I’ve been reminded repeatedly of this truth recently:
Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. Romans 14:4 English Standard Version (ESV)
The immediate context is the weaker brother among those in the church at Rome, which was composed of former Jews trained to obey the Law and regulations and others who were never exposed to those regulations. Each looked down on the other for their freedoms and bondages.
Nowadays we look down on a brother (or sister) if they don’t dress the way we do, or perform ceremonies the way we do, work for an employer the way we do, or look at the world the way we do, or behave as responsibly as we do. I could go on. I’m sure you could supply more examples.
About this scripture passage, John Calvin comments:
To his own Lord he stands or falls, etc. As though he said, — “It belongs rightly to the Lord, either to disapprove, or to accept what his servant doeth: hence he robs the Lord, who attempts to take to himself this authority.” And he adds, he shall indeed stand: and by so saying, he not only bids us to abstain from condemning, but also exhorts us to mercy and kindness, so as ever to hope well of him, in whom we perceive anything of God; inasmuch as the Lord has given us a hope, that he will fully confirm, and lead to perfection, those in whom he has begun the work of grace [emphasis mine].
Lately, I’ve tried to practice what Calvin says constitutes true worship:
“God is not worshipped by external ceremonies, but when men forgive and bear with one another, and are not above measure rigid.”
and
“God values faith and kindness much more than sacrifices and all ceremonies.”
Instrumentality is not a well appreciated concept. But it is key to understanding both the nature of the universe and the nature of man. Google’s definition of the word is:
in·stru·men·tal·i·ty
noun
The fact or quality of serving as an instrument or means to an end; agency.
“A corporate body can act only through the instrumentality of human beings”
A thing that serves as an instrument or means to an end.
The principle of instrumentality is essential to understanding our universe. The scriptures record the creation of all things this way:
And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. Genesis 1:3-5 English Standard Version (ESV)
And later in the book:
And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so… And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. Genesis 1:14-19 (ESV)
Oops, God must have gotten it wrong. Shouldn’t the sun have been created before the light? Why didn’t He check in with some noted authority first, like Hawking or Tyson. We’ve presented what Tyson believes in our post ‘Neil deGrasse Tyson Mistakes God for Who He Is Not’
Our ready reference, John Calvin, says on the precedence of light over the sun:
Gen. 1:3 …Let there be light… It was proper that the light, by means of which the world was to be adorned with such excellent beauty, should be first created; and this also was the commencement of the distinction, (among the creatures). It did not, however, happen from inconsideration or by accident, that the light preceded the sun and the moon.
To nothing are we more prone than to tie down the power of God to those instruments the agency of which he employs. The sun and moon supply us with light: And, according to our notions we so include this power to give light in them, that if they were taken away from the world, it would seem impossible for any light to remain.
Therefore the Lord, by the very order of the creation, bears witness that he holds in his hand the light, which he is able to impart to us without the sun and moon.
We aren’t sure what you think of the scriptures as an authority for wisdom. Many modern-day teachers would have you believe they are unreliable and, in many cases, downright fallacious. We’ve addressed this in ‘Nip ‘Em in the Bud.’
However, the remark that the Lord Jesus Christ made to teachers of His people who were trying to trip Him up on another matter is appropriate for our teachers today:
Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God? Mark 12:24 (ESV)
Martian sunset: Spirit at Gusev crater, 19 May 2005, NASA’s Mars Exploration Rover, Public Domain
The principle of instrumentality is also essential to understanding humanity. Paul describes himself, and us by generalization, as jars of clay:
For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. 2 Corinthians 4:6-7 (ESV)
2 Corinthians 4:7. But we have this treasure. Those that heard Paul glorying in such a magnificent strain as to the excellence of his ministry, and beheld, on the other hand, his person, contemptible and abject in the eyes of the world, might be apt to think that he was a silly and ridiculous person, and might look upon his boasting as childish, while forming their estimate of him from the meanness of his person…
First of all, he employs the similitude of a treasure, which is not usually laid up in a splendid and elegantly adorned chest, but rather in some vessel that is mean and worthless; and then farther, he subjoins, that the power of God is, by that means, the more illustrated, and is the better seen…
“…Farther, they do not consider, that it is ordered by the special Providence of God, that there should be in ministers no appearance of excellence, lest anything of distinction should throw the power of God into the shade. As, therefore, the abasement of ministers, and the outward contempt of their persons give occasion for glory accruing to God, that man acts a wicked part, who measures the dignity of the gospel by the person of the minister.”
Paul, however, does not speak merely of the universal condition of mankind, but of his own condition in particular. It is true, indeed, that all mortal men are earthen vessels. Hence, let the most eminent of them all be selected, and let him be one that is adorned to admiration with all ornaments of birth, intellect, and fortune, still, if he be a minister of the gospel, he will be a mean and merely earthen depository of an inestimable treasure. Paul, however, has in view himself, and others like himself, his associates, who were held in contempt, because they had nothing of show.
So why is this instrumentality important for understanding the nature of man? For at least two reasons, first, it seems we’ll be augmenting, modifying, and curing ourselves using brain implants routinely someday. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) requested proposals for SUBNETS, Systems-Based Neurotechnology for Emerging Therapies, in 2013. Their website describes the project and the expected results:
The Systems-Based Neurotechnology for Emerging Therapies (SUBNETS) program was created in response to a pressing need. Despite the continued best efforts of the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs to protect the health of U.S. service members and veterans, the effects of neuropsychological illness brought on by war, traumatic injuries, and other experiences remain challenging to treat. Current approaches—surgery, medications, and psychotherapy—can often help to alleviate the worst effects of illnesses such as major depression and post-traumatic stress, but they are imprecise and not universally effective. Through SUBNETS, DARPA hopes to generate the knowledge and technology required to deliver relief to patients with otherwise intractable neuropsychological illness.
The SUBNETS vision is distinct from current therapeutic approaches in that it seeks to create an implanted, closed-loop diagnostic and therapeutic system for treating, and possibly even curing, neuropsychological illness. That vision is premised on the understanding that brain function—and dysfunction, in the case of neuropsychological illness—plays out across distributed neural systems, as opposed to being strictly relegated to distinct anatomical regions of the brain. The program also aims to take advantage of neural plasticity, a feature of the brain by which the organ’s anatomy and physiology alter over time to support normal brain function. Because of plasticity, researchers are optimistic that by using SUBNETS-developed technology the brain can be trained or treated to restore normal functionality following injury or the onset of neuropsychological illness.
…The program will pursue a new investigative approach that establishes the characteristics of distributed neural systems and attempts to develop and apply therapies that incorporate near real-time recording, analysis and stimulation in next-generation devices inspired by current Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS).
DBS already exists as a therapy option for certain neurologic and neuropsychological illnesses in patients who are not responsive to other therapies. Approximately 100,000 people around the globe live with a DBS implant, a device that delivers electrical stimulation to reduce the motor impairment caused by Parkinson’s disease and dystonia. These devices are also being studied as therapy for depression, obsessive compulsive disorder, Tourette’s and epilepsy…
DARPA is specifically interested in evaluating the underlying systems which contribute to the following conditions as described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depression, Borderline Personality Disorder and General Anxiety Disorder. DARPA also seeks to evaluate the representation in the central nervous system of: Traumatic Brain Injury, Substance Abuse/Addiction and Fibromyalgia/Chronic Pain.
Because programs like SUBNETS push the leading edge of science, they are sometimes society’s first encounter with the dilemmas associated with new technologies. DARPA pursues these technologies because of their promise, but the Agency understands that it is important to consider ethical, legal, societal and policy questions. For that reason, DARPA has convened an Ethical, Legal and Social Implications (ELSI) panel to inform and advise SUBNETS and other emerging neuroscience efforts.
The latest 2014 DARPA Press Release, as of this post, is here.
The second reason is the nature of our personhood in the face of the ravages of degenerative diseases. If all we are arises from materiality, then when the material fails, that which is us also falters.
However, not all secular scientists would claim a direct material basis for personhood; nevertheless, they claim emergence from the material substrate in the sense of M. Polanyi. In this regard, we’ve covered David Chalmers’s views on consciousness briefly in a previous post.
But, there are serious issues to contemplate with what Alzheimer’s disease and other dementia mean for us as persons. HuffPo and WSJ have run touching stories.
We have briefly touched on what Francis Schaeffer referred to the ‘soulishness of man’ in this blog. Calvin offers analysis of the outward and inner man referred to in 2 Corinthians 4:16-18.
2 Corinthians 4:16. Though our outward man. The outward man, some improperly and ignorantly confound with the old man, for widely different from this is the old man, of which we have spoken in Romans 4:6. Chrysostom, too, and others restrict it entirely to the body; but it is a mistake, for the Apostle intended to comprehend, under this term, everything that relates to the present life. As he here sets before us two men, so you must place before your view two kinds of life — the earthly and the heavenly.
The outward man is the maintenance of the earthly life, which consists not merely in the flower of one’s age, (1 Corinthians 7:36) and in good health, but also in riches, honors, friendships, and other resources. Hence, according as we suffer a diminution or loss of these blessings, which are requisite for keeping up the condition of the present life, is our outward man in that proportion corrupted…
Thus, therefore, it is necessary, that the condition of the present life should decay, in order that the inward man may be in a flourishing state; because, in proportion as the earthly life declines, does the heavenly life advance, at least in believers. For in the reprobate, too, the outward man decays, but without anything to compensate for it…
2 Corinthians 4:17. Momentary lightness. As our flesh always shrinks back from its own destruction, whatever reward may be presented to our view, and as we are influenced much more by present feeling than by the hope of heavenly blessings, Paul on that account admonishes us, that the afflictions and vexations of the pious have little or nothing of bitterness, if compared with the boundless blessings of everlasting glory…
As, however, the decay is visible, and the renovation is invisible, Paul, with the view of shaking us off from a carnal attachment to the present life, draws a comparison between present miseries and future felicity…
So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal. 2 Corinthians 4:16-18 (ESV)
Terracotta Army detail, Xi’an, China, 9 April 2005, Photo by Peter Morgan from Nomadic, CCA 2.0 Generic
The Lord Jesus Christ referred to this scripture twice as recorded in the gospels.
On the first occasion, His message seems to be: associate with the sin sick to bring them healing and exhort those, who consider themselves well and in no need of a doctor, that they need healing, too.
And as Jesus reclined at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were reclining with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” But when he heard it, he said, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” Matthew 9:10-13 English Standard Version (ESV)
On the second occasion, He urged those who considered themselves righteous to obey the substance and not just the form of God’s commandments.
Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless.For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:5-8 (ESV)
But to what scripture (because the New Testament was not yet written) was the Lord referring? He quoted Hosea 6:6, but verses six and seven complete a thought.
For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.
But like Adam they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me.
It is a remarkable passage; the Son of God has twice quoted it. The Pharisees reproached him for his intercourse with men of bad and abandoned life, and he said to them in Matthew 9, ‘Mercy I desire, and not sacrifice.’ He shows, by this defense, that God is not worshipped by external ceremonies, but when men forgive and bear with one another, and are not above measure rigid. [emphasis added]
Again, in the Matthew 12, when the Pharisees blamed the disciples for gathering ears of corn, he said ‘But rather go and learn what this is, Mercy I desire, and not sacrifice.’ Inasmuch as they were so severe against his disciples, Christ shows that those who make holiness to consist in ceremonies are foolish worshipers of God; and that they also blamed their brethren without a cause, and made a crime of what was not in itself sinful, and what could be easily defended by any wise and calm expounder.
Calvin adds concerning verse seven:
God then subjoins a complaint, — But they like men have transgressed the covenant; there have they dealt treacherously against me. Here God shows that the Israelites boasted in vain of their sacrifices and of all the pomps of their external worship, for God did not regard these external things, but only wished to exercise the faithful in spiritual worship.
Then the import of the whole is this, “My design was, when I appointed the sacrifices and the whole legal worship, to lead you so to myself, that there might be nothing carnal or earthly in your sacrificing; but ye have corrupted the whole law; you have been perverse interpreters; for sacrifices have been nothing else among you but mockery as if it were a satisfaction to me to have an ox or a ram killed. You have then transgressed my covenant; and it is nothing that the people say to me, that they have diligently performed the outward ceremonies, for such a worship is not in the least valued by me.”
We can (and must) replace Calvin’s reference to ‘Israelites who boast in vain’ with the ‘unbelieving church of that age,’ for such they were. And we have these same with us today. It’s not as if they are unaware of the substance of proper worship, it’s just less costly (in the here and now) to practice merely the form of it.
At least two of these folks asked the Lord, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” He answered:
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”
On another occasion He asked one of these folks how they understood the scriptures in a nutshell and they gave the same answer. To this one, the Lord said, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”
Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him.
Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground.
But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
So there we have it. When someone is repentant from the heart (and surely she was), the Lord says:
“Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
Please forgive this Hollywood conceit: “The arrogance of man is thinking nature is under our control, and not the other way around.” Actually, the Lord Jesus Christ is in control but we don’t even believe the Hollywood metaphor, so…
Godzilla – Asia Trailer [HD]
It’s not as if there was some gathering storm on the horizon.
5/18/14 Wright to Newcastle, WY Supercell Time-Lapse
Of course, that’s not what some would have you believe.
Chris Mooney’s MJ article ‘This Ice Sheet Will Unleash a Global Superstorm Sandy That Never Ends’ explains that glaciologist Richard Alley claims losing West Antarctica would produce 10 feet of sea level rise in coming centuries. That’s comparable to the flooding from Sandy—but permanent.
A large section of the mighty West Antarctica ice sheet has begun falling apart and its continued melting now appears to be unstoppable, two groups of scientists reported on Monday. If the findings hold up, they suggest that the melting could destabilize neighboring parts of the ice sheet and a rise in sea level of 10 feet or more may be unavoidable…
Glaciologists use the word “collapse” to describe a shift towards an irretrievable loss of an ice sheet. There is, reckons Dr Joughin, probably nothing that can now be done to save the Thwaites glacier. Much of the coverage of the new studies, though, suggests there will be a collapse in the everyday, imminent sense of the word.
Dr Joughin’s models predict that once the loss of ice from the Thwaites glacier really gets going, it may be enough to raise sea levels by a further 1mm a year by itself. But they also predict that this will not start to happen for at least another 200 years—and perhaps much longer than that. Bad news, then, but not quite a collapse—or at least, not on human timescales.
But what’s the worst that can happen?
Quoted in a WSJ opinion article, Secretary Kerry said, while addressing graduates of Boston College,
If we make the necessary efforts to address this challenge—and supposing I’m wrong or scientists are wrong, 97% of them all wrong—supposing they are, what’s the worst that can happen? …We put millions of people to work transitioning our energy, creating new and renewable and alternative; we make life healthier because we have less particulates in the air and cleaner air and more health; we give ourselves greater security through greater energy independence—that’s the downside.
The WSJ opinion author says:
The “worst that can happen” is that we spend trillions of dollars trying to solve a problem that we can’t do anything to stop; that we misallocate scarce resources in a way that slows economic growth; that slower growth leads to less economic opportunity for Boston College grads and especially the world’s poor, and that America and the world become much less wealthy and technologically advanced than we would otherwise. All of which would make the world less able to cope with the costs of climate change if Mr. Kerry is right.
And 97% of scientists are agreed so, from a postmodern perspective, it must be settled. I bet 99 and 44/100 percent believed in the Aether before Einstein’s special relativity was verified (Aether is on the march again, though; a relativistic Aether this time).
However, let’s not forget: Truth does not depend on man’s theories, only his theories do.
The climate change controversy seems to be a case of agnotology, the study of how ignorance arises via circulation of misinformation calculated to mislead. Quoting from the abstract for ‘Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change’
Agnotology, then, is a two-edged sword since either side in a debate may claim that general ignorance arises from misinformation allegedly circulated by the other. Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain. Therefore, Legates et al. appropriately asserted that partisan presentations of controversies stifle debate and have no place in education.
Under the rule, states will be given a wide menu of policy options to achieve the pollution cuts. Rather than immediately shutting down coal plants, states would be allowed to reduce emissions by making changes across their electricity systems — by installing new wind and solar generation or energy-efficiency technology, and by starting or joining state and regional “cap and trade” programs, in which states agree to cap carbon pollution and buy and sell permits to pollute.
Under the draft rule, the EPA would let states and utilities meet the new standard with different approaches mixing four options including energy efficiency, shifting from coal to natural gas, investing in renewable energy and making power plant upgrades. Other compliance methods could include offering discounts to encourage consumers to shift electricity use to off-peak hours.
Republicans are using the proposed rule to assert that Democrats will raise energy costs and kill jobs, and that carbon restrictions are futile in the absence of similar action by China and other large polluting nations…
While Democrats are more vocal than Republicans in saying that man-made climate change is a problem, some in energy-producing states are wary of backing a government response…
Additional WSJ commentary claims large adverse economic impact for small climate improvement:
The EPA claims to be targeting “polluters,” but the government is essentially creating an artificial scarcity in carbon energy. Scarcities mean higher prices, which will hit the poor far harder than they will the anticarbon crusaders who live in Pacific Heights. The lowest 10% of earners pay three times as much as a share of their income for electricity compared to the middle class. If you want more inequality, this is an ideal way to ensure it.
and
The irony is that all the damage will do nothing for climate change. Based on the EPA’s own carbon accounting, shutting down every coal-fired power plant tomorrow and replacing them with zero-carbon sources would reduce the Earth’s temperature by about one-twentieth of a degree Fahrenheit in a hundred years.
And, of course, China is following suit with their own climate change measures. At least, that is, until their people rebel at the resulting deprivations.
Then there’s the whole issue of blatant racism. Caleb S. Rossiter explains in his opinion article ‘Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change.’
…Each American accounts for 20 times the emissions of each African. We [America] are not rationing our electricity. Why should Africa, which needs electricity for the sort of income-producing enterprises and infrastructure that help improve life expectancy? The average in Africa is 59 years—in America it’s 79. Increased access to electricity was crucial in China’s growth, which raised life expectancy to 75 today from 59 in 1968.
“For the vast majority of the world’s population,” Mr. Bryce argues, “the cheapest and most reliable forms of energy are, and will continue to be, hydrocarbons.” Anyone who thinks that he is doing the world a favor by compelling the switch from fossil fuels to wind and solar is consigning billions of people to a life of poverty and darkness.
We are meant to live peaceful and quiet lives, practicing true equity, and not using the poor (and soon to be poor) as pawns. But, as Calvin (no, the one from the Calvin and Hobbes comic) proves, we are all wet when we think we are in control.
To remove a bud from a plant to prevent flower and fruit from forming.
(idiomatic) To stop something at an early stage.
Phrases.org.uk says the idiom originated in 1607 and gives a definition:
Put a stop to something while it is still in its early development.
I think Wikidictionary definition one has been happening to my lilac bush for the past few years. But, let’s nip this silliness in the bud. What real importance does this idiomatic phrase hold for us?
It’s the usual approach used to discredit and cast doubt on the bible’s veracity. Why bother reading the Gospel of John when you can’t trust the very first book, Genesis, or so goes the argument. Really, the argument centers on the first two chapters of that first book. The bud, so to speak.
Wikipedia expounds on the controversy over the first two chapters of Genesis in their entry: Genesis creation narrative. The issues raised are: use of names of God, the uniqueness and mutability of man’s soul, and an issue with naming the animals and their creation. These discrepancies are attributed to different authorship and traditions. Also, the Wikipedia entry authors introduce the concept of borrowed mythology altered to represent monotheism.
Genesis, Chap. 2, Vs. 4. These are the generations… Some of the Hebrews think that the essential name of God is here at length expressed by Moses, because his majesty shines forth more clearly in the completed world.
To this, the Commentary translator, John King, adds:
A new section of the history of Moses commences at this point; and, from the repetition which occurs of some facts — such as the creation of man — which had been recorded in the preceding chapter, as well as from certain peculiarities of phraseology, many learned men have inferred, that the early portion of the Mosaic history is older than the time of Moses, and that he, under the infallible direction of the Spirit of God, collected and arranged the several fragments of primeval annals in one consistent narrative.
One chief argument on which such a conclusion rests is, that from the commencement of the first chapter to the end of the third verse of the second chapter, God is spoken of only under the name of Elohim [Spirit of God]; from the fourth verse of the second to the end of the third chapter, he is uniformly styled Jehovah Elohim [Self existent one, Spirit of God]; and in the fourth and fifth chapters, the name of Elohim or of Jehovah stands alone.
This, it is argued, could scarcely have occurred without some cause; and the inference has been drawn, that different records had different forms of expression, which Moses did not alter, unless truth required him to do so.
Against this view, however, [another commentator] argues with considerable force, in his Dissertation “on the Names of God in the Pentateuch;”… that these names are intended to present the Divine character under different aspects to our view.
As to uniqueness of man, Calvin says:
Chap. 1, Vs. 26, Let us make man…In our image… Therefore by this word the perfection of our whole nature is designated, as it appeared when Adam was endued with a right judgment, had affections in harmony with reason, had all his senses sound and well-regulated, and truly excelled in everything good.
Thus the chief seat of the Divine image was in his mind and heart, where it was eminent: yet was there no part of him in which some scintillations of it did not shine forth. …In the mind perfect intelligence flourished and reigned, uprightness attended as its companion, and all the senses were prepared and molded for due obedience to reason; and in the body there was a suitable correspondence with this internal order.
As to uniqueness of man’s soul as opposed to those of the animals, Calvin says:
Chap. 2, Vs. 7, And the Lord God formed man… Nevertheless, he, at the same time, designed to distinguish man by some mark of excellence from brute animals: for these arose out of the earth in a moment; but the peculiar dignity of man is shown in this, that he was gradually formed. For why did not God command him immediately to spring alive out of the earth, unless that, by a special privilege, he might outshine all the creatures which the earth produced?
And breathed into his nostrils… Three gradations, indeed, are to be noted in the creation of man; that his dead body was formed out of the dust of the earth; that it was endued with a soul, whence it should receive vital motion; and that on this soul God engraved his own image, to which immortality is annexed.
Man became a living soul I take nepesh for the very essence of the soul: but the epithet living suits only the present place, and does not embrace generally the powers of the soul. For Moses intended nothing more than to explain the animating of the clayey figure, whereby it came to pass that man began to live…
As to changeability of man’s condition, Calvin says:
Chap. 1, Vs. 26, Let us make man…In our image… But now, although some obscure lineaments of that image are found remaining in us; yet are they so vitiated and maimed, that they may truly be said to be destroyed. For besides the deformity which everywhere appears unsightly, this evil also is added, that no part is free from the infection of sin.
Chap. 3, Vs. 6, And gave also unto her husband with her… Pride was the beginning of all evils, and that by pride the human race was ruined. Yet a fuller definition of the sin may be drawn from the kind of temptation which Moses describes. For first the woman is led away from the word of God by the wiles of Satan, through unbelief. Wherefore, the commencement of the ruin by which the human race was overthrown was a defection from the command of God.
…At length, having despised the command of God, they not only indulge their own lust, but enslave themselves to the devil. If anyone prefers a shorter explanation, we may say unbelief has opened the door to ambition, but ambition has proved the parent of rebellion, to the end that men, having cast aside the fear of God, might shake off his yoke.
Chap. 3, Vs. 7, And the eyes of them both were opened… God created man flexible; and not only permitted, but willed that he should be tempted. …Therefore, whatever sin and fault there is in the fall of our first parents remains with themselves; but there is sufficient reason why the eternal counsel of God preceded it, though that reason is concealed from us.
As to the creation act, Calvin says:
Chap. 1, Vs. 3, And God said… Moses now, for the first time, introduces God in the act of speaking, as if he had created the mass of heaven and earth without the Word. Yet John testifies that ‘without him nothing was made of the things which were made,’ (John 1:3). And it is certain that the world had been begun by the same efficacy of the Word by which it was completed. God, however, did not put forth his Word until he proceeded to originate light; because in the act of distinguishing, his wisdom begins to be conspicuous.
Chap. 1, Vs. 5, The first day… Here the error of those is manifestly refuted, who maintain that the world was made in a moment. For it is too violent a cavil to contend that Moses distributes the work which God perfected at once into six days, for the mere purpose of conveying instruction.
Let us rather conclude that God himself took the space of six days, for the purpose of accommodating his works to the capacity of men. We slightingly pass over the infinite glory of God, which here shines forth; whence arises this but from our excessive dullness in considering his greatness? In the meantime, the vanity of our minds carries us away elsewhere.
For the correction of this fault, God applied the most suitable remedy when he distributed the creation of the world into successive portions that he might fix our attention, and compel us, as if he had laid his hand upon us, to pause and to reflect.
As to the first and second accounts of creation, he says:
Chap. 2, Vs. 4, These are the generations… The design of Moses was deeply to impress upon our minds the origin of the heaven and the earth, which he designates by the word generation… Wherefore, it is not a superfluous repetition which inculcates the necessary fact that the world existed only from the time when it was created since such knowledge directs us to its Architect and Author.
Chap. 2, Vs. 7, And the Lord God formed man… He now explains what he had before omitted in the creation of man that his body was taken out of the earth. He had said that he was formed after the image of God…
As to other creation accounts, he says:
Chap. 1, Vs. 1, In the beginning… [Moses] moreover teaches by the word “created,” that what before did not exist was now made; for he has not used the term yatsar, which signifies to frame or forms but bara which signifies to create. Therefore his meaning is that the world was made out of nothing.
Hence the folly of those is refuted who imagine that unformed matter existed from eternity; and who gather nothing else from the narration of Moses than that the world was furnished with new ornaments, and received a form of which it was before destitute.
This indeed was formerly a common fable among heathens, who had received only an obscure report of the creation, and who, according to custom, adulterated the truth of God with strange figments; but for Christian men to labor …in maintaining this gross error is absurd and intolerable. Let this, then be maintained in the first place, that the world is not eternal but was created by God.
On an interesting point to note about God’s all–encompassing sovereignty, Calvin expounds:
Chap. 1, Vs. 3, Let there be light… It was proper that the light, by means of which the world was to be adorned with such excellent beauty, should be first created; …It did not, however, happen from inconsideration or by accident, that the light preceded the [creation of] sun and the moon.
To nothing are we more prone than to tie down the power of God to those instruments the agency of which he employs. The sun and moon supply us with light: And, according to our notions we so include this power to give light in them, that if they were taken away from the world, it would seem impossible for any light to remain.
Therefore the Lord, by the very order of the creation, bears witness that he holds in his hand the light, which he is able to impart to us without the sun and moon.
“It should scarcely be passed without remark that Calvin’s doctrine of creation is, if we have understood it aright, for all except the souls of men, an evolutionary one. The ‘indigested mass,’ including the ‘promise and potency’ of all that was yet to be, was called into being by the simple fiat of God. But all that has come into being since — except the souls of men alone — has arisen as a modification of this original world-stuff by means of the interaction of its intrinsic forces. Not these forces apart from God, of course…”
Warfield’s incorrect attempt to reconcile Calvin’s Commentary with Darwin’s evolution theory through old earth creationism sounds very much like this dawn of man scene from 2001 space odyssey.
Dawn of Man Scene from 2001 Space Odyssey
You can’t have it both ways. As was said above, God is free to create in ways, timing, and manner as He sees fit ex-nihilo. He has graciously accommodated us in how He structured creation. Dorothy L. Sayers put forward an idea for us to understand the creation of man in the context of the fossil record as a unique act of creation with a perfect backstory (see Every Good Story – Thysdor Ya’Rosel).
If you attack the trustworthiness of the very first chapters, then have you not undermined the foundations and left entry for utter destruction of the rest? This can be seen in the split from Princeton Theological Seminary (PTS) after Warfield’s tenure by Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS) under Machen in 1929. PTS abandoned the veracity of God’s word. WTS was formed to uphold it. The attack was successful then and it will be so again if we don’t hold on to the truth of the word of God.
Evolutionist propagandists are not concerned with the proper order of sediments, transitionary evidence, or aeons. Their concern is not for truth. Their concern is like those of their ancient compatriots, to throw off the yoke of the Lord who made them. For what purpose but that they may go their own way. And so they shall. Will you, however, follow them?
Expulsion from the Garden of Eden, 1828, by Thomas Cole (1801–1848), public domain – US
Institutes, Chapter 6: …For if we reflect how prone the human mind is to lapse into forgetfulness of God, how readily inclined to every kind of error, how bent every now and then on devising new and fictitious religions, it will be easy to understand how necessary it was to make such a depository of doctrine as would secure it from either perishing by the neglect, vanishing away amid the errors, or being corrupted by the presumptuous audacity of men.
It being thus manifest that God, foreseeing the inefficiency of his image imprinted on the fair form of the universe, has given the assistance of his Word to all whom he has ever been pleased to instruct effectually, we, too, must pursue this straight path, if we aspire in earnest to a genuine contemplation of God;—we must go, I say, to the Word, where the character of God, drawn from his works is described accurately and to the life; these works being estimated, not by our depraved Judgment, but by the standard of eternal truth.
Institutes, Chapter 7: …The next thing to be considered is, how it appears not probable merely, but certain, that the name of God is neither rashly nor cunningly pretended. If, then, we would consult most effectually for our consciences, and save them from being driven about in a whirl of uncertainty, from wavering, and even stumbling at the smallest obstacle, our conviction of the truth of Scripture must be derived from a higher source than human conjectures, Judgments, or reasons; namely, the secret testimony of the Spirit…
Still, however, it is preposterous to attempt, by discussion, to rear up a full faith in Scripture…. Profane men think that religion rests only on opinion, and, therefore, that they may not believe foolishly, or on slight grounds, desire and insist to have it proved by reason that Moses and the prophets were divinely inspired. But I answer, that the testimony of the Spirit is superior to reason. For as God alone can properly bear witness to his own words, so these words will not obtain full credit in the hearts of men, until they are sealed by the inward testimony of the Spirit…
Institutes, Chapter 8: …For it is wonderful how much we are confirmed in our belief, when we more attentively consider how admirably the system of divine wisdom contained in it is arranged—how perfectly free the doctrine is from everything that savors of earth—how beautifully it harmonizes in all its parts—and how rich it is in all the other qualities which give an air of majesty to composition.
Our hearts are still more firmly assured when we reflect that our admiration is elicited more by the dignity of the matter than by the graces of style. For it was not without an admirable arrangement of Providence, that the sublime mysteries of the kingdom of heaven have for the greater part been delivered with a contemptible meanness of words.
Had they been adorned with a more splendid eloquence, the wicked might have caviled, and alleged that this constituted all their force. But now, when an unpolished simplicity, almost bordering on rudeness, makes a deeper impression than the loftiest flights of oratory, what does it indicate if not that the Holy Scriptures are too mighty in the power of truth to need the rhetorician’s art?
In light of our previous post, we do not so much agree with the tone with which Calvin defends his positions (and these are mild). He’d definitely have given the current crop of vehement deniers a run for their money were he alive in this day and age.
Lake Geneva after storm. Picture taken from Montreux, on the left side in the rays of light – Saint-Gingolph by Rulexip. (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported)
Why are we shocked when things like this, this, or this happen?
These sensational stories are tragic, no doubt. Scary, even. But we seem to think we’d never do or even be capable of such heinous acts. Then we bolt our door against our neighbor (rightly or wrongly, I can’t say; that’s up to you). Some believe we’re naturally moral. Still others say: red in tooth and claw.
The scriptures conclude we all fall short of God’s glory. But isn’t this an overstatement of our condition? Aren’t we really good, but just misguided, unmotivated, or low informational?
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God. 12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.” 13 “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.” 14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” 15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 in their paths are ruin and misery, 17 and the way of peace they have not known.” 18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
So, we have no excuse to be shocked at these sensational stories. This is the condition of man. However, if this is so, why then do we not claw and bite until we are no more?
John Calvin, a theologian not often cited now–a–days, suggests in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, book 1, chapter 17, and paragraph 11:
…How comes it, I ask, that their confidence never fails, but just that while the world apparently revolves at random, they know that God is everywhere at work, and feel assured that his work will be their safety? When assailed by the devil and wicked men, were they not confirmed by remembering and meditating on Providence, they should, of necessity, forthwith despond. But when they call to mind that the devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are, in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how much so ever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay, unless in so far as he commands; that they are not only bound by his fetters, but are even forced to do him service,—when the godly think of all these things they have ample sources of consolation. For, as it belongs to the lord to arm the fury of such foes and turn and destine it at pleasure, so it is his also to determine the measure and the end, so as to prevent them from breaking loose and wantoning as they list…
So God not only constrains the evildoer but commands him to do His bidding, yet without complicity or taint thrown back upon Him. But why, if we’re this way, are we guilty at all?
Calvin says in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, book 1, chapter 17, and paragraph 5:
… As all contingencies whatsoever depend on it, therefore, neither thefts nor adulteries, nor murders, are perpetrated without an interposition of the divine will. Why, then, they ask, should the thief be punished for robbing him whom the Lord chose to chastise with poverty? Why should the murderer be punished for slaying him whose life the Lord had terminated? If all such persons serve the will of God, why should they be punished?
I deny that they serve the will of God. For we cannot say that he who is carried away by a wicked mind performs service on the order of God, when he is only following his own malignant desires. He obeys God, who, being instructed in his will, hastens in the direction in which God calls him.
But how are we so instructed unless by his word? The will declared by his word is, therefore, that which we must keep in view in acting, God requires of us nothing but what he enjoins. If we design anything contrary to his precept, it is not obedience, but contumacy and transgression. But if he did not will it, we could not do it. I admit this.
But do we act wickedly for the purpose of yielding obedience to him? This, assuredly, he does not command. Nay, rather we rush on, not thinking of what he wishes, but so inflamed by our own passionate lust, that, with destined purpose, we strive against him. And in this way,while acting wickedly, we serve his righteous ordination, since in his boundless wisdom he well knows how to use bad instruments for good purposes.
And see how absurd this mode of arguing is. They will have it that crimes ought not to be punished in their authors, because they are not committed without the dispensation of God. I concede more—that thieves and murderers, and other evil-doers, are instruments of Divine Providence, being employed by the Lord himself to execute the Judgments which he has resolved to inflict.
But I deny that this forms any excuse for their misdeeds. For how? Will they implicate God in the same iniquity with themselves, or will they cloak their depravity by his righteousness? They cannot exculpate themselves, for their own conscience condemns them: they cannot charge God, since they perceive the whole wickedness in themselves, and nothing in Him save the legitimate use of their wickedness…
So, it is apparent that Romans 3 is true and we are not only held back from what we could do but others are employed to execute God’s judgments and, yet, are solely guilty of their transgression.
Mandated Memoranda 