(Calvin, Institutes on the Christian Religion 1, part 8)
Chapter 8
8. The credibility of Scripture sufficiently proved in so far as
natural reason admits.
This chapter consists of four parts. The first contains certain
general proofs which may be easily gathered out of the writings both
of the Old and New Testament, viz., the arrangement of the sacred
volume, its dignity, truth, simplicity, efficacy, and majesty, see.
1, 2. The second part contains special proofs taken from the Old
Testament, viz., the antiquity of the books of Moses, their
authority, his miracles and prophecies, see. 3-7; also, the
predictions of the other prophets and their wondrous harmony, see.
8. There is subjoined a refutation of two objections to the books of
Moses and the Prophets, see. 9, 10. The third part exhibits proofs
gathered out of the New Testament, e. g., the harmony of the
Evangelists in their account of heavenly mysteries, the majesty of
the writings of John, Peter, and Paul, the remarkable calling of the
Apostles and conversion of Paul, see. 11. The last part exhibits the
proofs drawn from ecclesiastical history, the perpetual consent of
the Church in receiving and preserving divine truth, the invincible
force of the truth in defending itself, the agreement of the godly,
(though otherwise differing so much from one another,) the pious
profession of the same doctrine by many illustrious men; in fine,
the more than human constancy of the martyrs, see. 12, 13. This is
followed by a conclusion of the particular topic discussed.
Sections.
1. Secondary helps to establish the credibility of Scripture. I. The
arrangement of the sacred volume. II. Its dignity. III. Its
truth. IV. Its simplicity. V. Its efficacy.
2. The majesty conspicuous in the writings of the Prophets.
3. Special proofs from the Old Testament. I. The antiquity of the
Books of Moses.
4. This antiquity contrasted with the dreams of the Egyptians. II.
The majesty of the Books of Moses.
5. The miracles and prophecies of Moses. A profane objection
refuted.
6. Another profane objection refuted.
7. The prophecies of Moses as to the sceptre not departing from
Judah, and the calling of the Gentiles.
8. The predictions of other prophets. The destruction of Jerusalem;
and the return from the Babylonish captivity. Harmony of the
Prophets. The celebrated prophecy of Daniel.
9. Objection against Moses and the Prophets. Answer to it.
10. Another objection and answer. Of the wondrous Providence of God
in the preservation of the sacred books. The Greek Translation.
The carefulness of the Jews.
11. Special proofs from the New Testament. I. The harmony of the
Evangelists, and the sublime simplicity of their writings. II.
The majesty of John, Paul, and Peter. III. The calling of the
Apostles. IV. The conversion of Paul.
12. Proofs from Church history. I. Perpetual consent of the Church
in receiving and preserving the truth. II. The invincible power
of the truth itself. III. Agreement among the godly, not
withstanding of their many differences in other respects.
13. The constancy of the martyrs. Conclusion. Proofs of this
description only of use after the certainty of Scripture has
been established in the heart by the Holy Spirit.
1. In vain were the authority of Scripture fortified by
argument, or supported by the consent of the Church, or confirmed by
any other helps, if unaccompanied by an assurance higher and
stronger than human judgement can give. Till this better foundation
has been laid, the authority of Scripture remains in suspense. On
the other hand, when recognising its exemption from the common rule,
we receive it reverently, and according to its dignity, those proofs
which were not so strong as to produce and rivet a full conviction
in our minds, become most appropriate helps. 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 every thing
that savours of earth - how beautifully it harmonises 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
cavilled, 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?
Hence there was good ground for the Apostle's declaration, that
the faith of the Corinthians was founded not on "the wisdom of men,"
but on "the power of God," (1 Cor. 2: 5,) this speech and preaching
among them having been "not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but
in demonstration of the Spirit and of power," (1 Cor. 2: 5.) For the
truth is vindicated in opposition to every doubt, when, unsupported
by foreign aid, it has its sole sufficiency in itself. How
peculiarly this property belongs to Scripture appears from this,
that no human writings, however skilfully composed, are at all
capable of affecting us in a similar way. Read Demosthenes or
Cicero, read Plato, Aristotle, or any other of that class: you will,
I admit, feel wonderfully allured, pleased, moved, enchanted; but
turn from them to the reading of the Sacred Volume, and whether you
will or not, it will so affect you, so pierce your heart, so work
its way into your very marrow, that, in comparison of the impression
so produced, that of orators and philosophers will almost disappear;
making it manifest that in the Sacred Volume there is a truth
divine, a something which makes it immeasurably superior to all the
gifts and graces attainable by man.
2. I confess, however, that in elegance and beauty, nay,
splendour, the style of some of the prophets is not surpassed by the
eloquence of heathen writers. By examples of this description, the
Holy Spirit was pleased to show that it was not from want of
eloquence he in other instances used a rude and homely style. But
whether you read David, Isaiah, and others of the same class, whose
discourse flows sweet and pleasant; or Amos the herdsman, Jeremiah,
and Zechariah, whose rougher idiom savours of rusticity; that
majesty of the Spirit to which I adverted appears conspicuous in
all. I am not unaware, that as Satan often apes God, that he may by
a fallacious resemblance the better insinuate himself into the minds
of the simple, so he craftily disseminated the impious errors with
which he deceived miserable men in an uncouth and semi-barbarous
style, and frequently employed obsolete forms of expression in order
to cloak his impostures. None possessed of any moderate share of
sense need be told how vain and vile such affectation is. But in
regard to the Holy Scriptures, however petulant men may attempt to
carp at them, they are replete with sentiments which it is clear
that man never could have conceived. Let each of the prophets be
examined, and not one will be found who does not rise far higher
than human reach. Those who feel their works insipid must be
absolutely devoid of taste.
3. As this subject has been treated at large by others, it will
be sufficient here merely to touch on its leading points. In
addition to the qualities already mentioned, great weight is due to
the antiquity of Scripture, (Euseb. Prepar. Evang. lib. 2 c. 1.)
Whatever fables Greek writers may retail concerning the Egyptian
Theology, no monument of any religion exists which is not long
posterior to the age of Moses. But Moses does not introduce a new
Deity. He only sets forth that doctrine concerning the eternal God
which the Israelites had received by tradition from their fathers,
by whom it had been transmitted, as it were, from hand to hand,
during a long series of ages. For what else does he do than lead
them back to the covenant which had been made with Abraham? Had he
referred to matters of which they had never heard, he never could
have succeeded; but their deliverance from the bondage in which they
were held must have been a fact of familiar and universal notoriety,
the very mention of which must have immediately aroused the
attention of all. It is, moreover, probable, that they were
intimately acquainted with the whole period of four hundred years.
Now, if Moses (who is so much earlier than all other writers) traces
the tradition of his doctrine from so remote a period, it is obvious
how far the Holy Scriptures must in point of antiquity surpass all
other writings.
4. Some perhaps may choose to credit the Egyptians in carrying
back their antiquity to a period of six thousand years before the
world was created. But their garrulity, which even some profane
authors have held up to derision, it cannot be necessary for me to
refute. Josephus, however, in his work against Appion, produces
important passages from very ancient writers, implying that the
doctrine delivered in the law was celebrated among all nations from
the remotest ages, though it was neither read nor accurately known.
And then, in order that the malignant might have no ground for
suspicion, and the ungodly no handle for cavil, God has provided, in
the most effectual manner, against both dangers. When Moses relates
the words which Jacob, under Divine inspiration, uttered concerning
his posterity almost three hundred years before, how does he ennoble
his own tribe? He stigmatises it with eternal infamy in the person
of Levi. "Simon and Levi," says he, "are brethren; instruments of
cruelty are in their habitations. O my soul, come not thou into
their secret; unto their assembly mine honour be not thou united,"
(Gen. 49: 5, 6.) This stigma he certainly might have passed in
silence, not only that he might spare his own ancestor, but also
save both himself and his whole family from a portion of the
disgrace. How can any suspicion attach to him, who, by voluntarily
proclaiming that the first founder of his family was declared
detestable by a Divine oracle, neither consults for his own private
interest, nor declines to incur obloquy among his tribe, who must
have been offended by his statement of the fact? Again, when he
relates the wicked murmuring of his brother Aaron, and his sister
Miriam, (Numb. 12: 1,) shall we say that he spoke his own natural
feelings, or that he obeyed the command of the Holy Spirit?
Moreover, when invested with supreme authority, why does he not
bestow the office of High Priest on his sons, instead of consigning
them to the lowest place? I only touch on a few points out of many;
but the Law itself contains throughout numerous proofs, which fully
vindicate the credibility of Moses, and place it beyond dispute,
that he was in truth a messenger sent forth from God.
5. The many striking miracles which Moses relates are so many
sanctions of the law delivered, and the doctrine propounded, by him.
His being carried up into the mount in a cloud; his remaining there
forty days separated from human society; his countenance glistening
during the promulgation of the law, as with meridian effulgence; the
lightnings which flashed on every side; the voices and thunderings
which echoed in the air; the clang of the trumpet blown by no human
mouth; his entrance into the tabernacle, while a cloud hid him from
the view of the people; the miraculous vindication of his authority,
by the fearful destruction of Korah, Nathan, and Abiram, and all
their impious faction; the stream instantly gushing forth from the
rock when struck with his rod; the manna which rained from heaven at
his prayer; - did not God by all these proclaim aloud that he was an
undoubted prophet? If any one object that I am taking debatable
points for granted, the cavil is easily answered. Moses published
all these things in the assembly of the people. How, then, could he
possibly impose on the very eye-witnesses of what was done? Is it
conceivable that he would have come forward, and, while accusing the
people of unbelief, obstinacy, ingratitude, and other crimes, have
boasted that his doctrine had been confirmed in their own presence
by miracles which they never saw?
6. For it is also worthy of remark, that the miracles which he
relates are combined with disagreeable circumstances, which must
have provoked opposition from the whole body of the people, if there
had been the smallest ground for it. Hence it is obvious that they
were induced to assent, merely because they had been previously
convinced by their own experience. But because the fact was too
clear to leave it free for heathen writers to deny that Moses did
perform miracles, the father of lies suggested a calumny, and
ascribed them to magic, (Exod. 9: 11.) But with what probability is
a charge of magic brought against him, who held it in such
abhorrence, that he ordered every one who should consult soothsayers
and magicians to be stoned? (Lev. 30: 6.) Assuredly, no impostor
deals in tricks, without studying to raise his reputation by amazing
the common people. But what does Moses do? By crying out, that he
and Aaron his brother are nothing, (Exod. 16: 7,) that they merely
execute what God has commanded, he clears himself from every
approach to suspicion. Again, if the facts are considered in
themselves, what kind of incantation could cause manna to rain from
heaven every day, and in sufficient quantity to maintain a people,
while any one, who gathered more than the appointed measure, saw his
incredulity divinely punished by its turning to worms? To this we
may add, that God then suffered his servant to be subjected to so
many serious trials, that the ungodly cannot now gain anything by
their glamour. When (as often happened) the people proudly and
petulantly rose up against him, when individuals conspired, and
attempted to overthrow him, how could any impostures have enabled
him to elude their rage? The event plainly shows that by these means
his doctrine was attested to all succeeding ages.
7. Moreover, it is impossible to deny that he was guided by a
prophetic spirit in assigning the first place to the tribe of Judah
in the person of Jacob, especially if we take into view the fact
itself, as explained by the event. Suppose that Moses was the
inventor of the prophecy, still, after he committed it to writing,
four hundred years pass away, during which no mention is made of a
sceptre in the tribe of Judah. After Saul is anointed, the kingly
office seems fixed in the tribe of Benjamin, (1 Sam. 11: 15; 16:
13.) When David is anointed by Samuel, what apparent ground is there
for the transference? Who could have looked for a king out of the
plebeian family of a herdsman? And out of seven brothers, who could
have thought that the honour was destined for the youngest? And then
by what means did he afterwards come within reach of the throne? Who
dare say that his anointing was regulated by human art, or skill, or
prudence, and was not rather the fulfilment of a divine prophecy? In
like manner, do not the predictions, though obscure, of the
admission of the Gentiles into the divine covenant, seeing they were
not fulfilled till almost two thousand years after, make it palpable
that Moses spoke under divine inspiration? I omit other predictions
which so plainly betoken divine revelation, that all men of sound
mind must see they were spoken by God. In short, his Song itself
(Deut. 32) is a bright mirror in which God is manifestly seen.
8. In the case of the other prophets the evidence is even
clearer. I will only select a few examples, for it were too tedious
to enumerate the whole. Isaiah, in his own day, when the kingdom of
Judah was at peace, and had even some ground to confide in the
protection of the Chaldeans, spoke of the destruction of the city
and the captivity of the people, (Isaiah 55: 1.) Supposing it not to
be sufficient evidence of divine inspiration to foretell, many years
before, events which, at the time, seemed fabulous, but which
ultimately turned out to be true, whence shall it be said that the
prophecies which he uttered concerning their return proceeded, if it
was not from God? He names Cyrus, by whom the Chaldeans were to be
subdued and the people restored to freedom. After the prophet thus
spoke, more than a hundred years elapsed before Cyrus was born, that
being nearly the period which elapsed between the death of the one
and the birth of the other. It was impossible at that time to guess
that some Cyrus would arise to make war on the Babylonians, and
after subduing their powerful monarchy, put an end to the captivity
of the children of Israel. Does not this simple, unadorned narrative
plainly demonstrate that what Isaiah spoke was not the conjecture of
man, but the undoubted oracle of God? Again, when Jeremiah, a
considerable time before the people were led away, assigned seventy
years as the period of captivity, and fixed their liberation and
return, must not his tongue have been guided by the Spirit of God?
What effrontery were it to deny that, by these evidences, the
authority of the prophets is established, the very thing being
fulfilled to which they appeal in support of their credibility!
"Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I
declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them," (Isaiah 42:
9.) I say nothing of the agreement between Jeremiah and Ezekiel,
who, living so far apart, and yet prophesying at the same time,
harmonise as completely in all they say as if they had mutually
dictated the words to one another. What shall I say of Daniel? Did
not he deliver prophecies embracing a future period of almost six
hundred years, as if he had been writing of past events generally
known? (Dan. 9, &c.) If the pious will duly meditate on these
things, they will be sufficiently instructed to silence the cavils
of the ungodly. The demonstration is too clear to be gainsaid.
9. I am aware of what is muttered in corners by certain
miscreants, when they would display their acuteness in assailing
divine truth. They ask, how do we know that Moses and the prophets
wrote the books which now bear their names? Nay, they even dare to
question whether there ever was a Moses. Were any one to question
whether there ever was a Plato, or an Aristotle, or a Cicero, would
not the rod or the whip be deemed the fit chastisement of such
folly? The law of Moses has been wonderfully preserved, more by
divine providence than by human care; and though, owing to the
negligence of the priests, it lay for a short time buried, - from
the time when it was found by good King Josiah, (2 Kings 22: 8; 2
Chron. 34: 15,) - it has continued in the hands of men, and been
transmitted in unbroken succession from generation to generation.
Nor, indeed, when Josiah brought it forth, was it as a book unknown
or new, but one which had always been matter of notoriety, and was
then in full remembrance. The original writing had been deposited in
the temple, and a copy taken from it had been deposited in the royal
archives, (Deut. 17: 18, 19;) the only thing which had occurred was,
that the priests had ceased to publish the law itself in due form,
and the people also had neglected the wonted reading of it. I may
add, that scarcely an age passed during which its authority was not
confirmed and renewed. Were the books of Moses unknown to those who
had the Psalms of David in their hands? To sum up the whole in one
word, it is certain beyond dispute, that these writings passed down,
if I may so express it, from hand to hand, being transmitted in an
unbroken series from the fathers, who either with their own ears
heard them spoken, or learned them from those who had, while the
remembrance of them was fresh.
10. An objection taken from the history of the Maccabees (1
Maccab. 1: 57, 58) to impugn the credibility of Scripture, is, on
the contrary, fitted the best possible to confirm it. First,
however, let us clear away the gloss which is put upon it: having
done so, we shall turn the engine which they erect against us upon
themselves. As Antiochus ordered all the books of Scripture to be
burnt, it is asked, where did the copies we now have come from? I,
in my turn, ask, In what workshop could they have been so quickly
fabricated? It is certain that they were in existence the moment the
persecution ceased, and that they were acknowledged without dispute
by all the pious who had been educated in their doctrine, and were
familiarly acquainted with them. Nay, while all the wicked so
wantonly insulted the Jews as if they had leagued together for the
purpose, not one ever dared to charge them with having introduced
spurious books. Whatever, in their opinion, the Jewish religion
might be, they acknowledged that Moses was the founder of it. What,
then, do those babblers, but betray their snarling petulance in
falsely alleging the spuriousness of books whose sacred antiquity is
proved by the consent of all history? But not to spend labour in
vain in refuting these vile calumnies, let us rather attend to the
care which the Lord took to preserve his Word, when against all hope
he rescued it from the truculence of a most cruel tyrant as from the
midst of the flames - inspiring pious priests and others with such
constancy that they hesitated not, though it should have been
purchased at the expense of their lives, to transmit this treasure
to posterity, and defeating the keenest search of prefects and their
satellites.
Who does not recognise it as a signal and miraculous work of
God, that those sacred monuments which the ungodly persuaded
themselves had utterly perished, immediately returned to resume
their former rights, and, indeed, in greater honour? For the Greek
translation appeared to disseminate them over the whole world. Nor
does it seem so wonderful that God rescued the tables of his
covenant from the sanguinary edicts of Antiochus, as that they
remained safe and entire amid the manifold disasters by which the
Jewish nation was occasionally crushed, devastated, and almost
exterminated. The Hebrew language was in no estimation, and almost
unknown; and assuredly, had not God provided for religion, it must
have utterly perished. For it is obvious from the prophetical
writings of that age, how much the Jews, after their return from the
captivity, had lost the genuine use of their native tongue. It is of
importance to attend to this, because the comparison more clearly
establishes the antiquity of the Law and the Prophets. And whom did
God employ to preserve the doctrine of salvation contained in the
Law and the Prophets, that Christ might manifest it in its own time?
The Jews, the bitterest enemies of Christ; and hence Augustine
justly calls them the librarians of the Christian Church, because
they supplied us with books of which they themselves had not the
use.
11. When we proceed to the New Testament, how solid are the
pillars by which its truth is supported! Three evangelists give a
narrative in a mean and humble style. The proud often eye this
simplicity with disdain, because they attend not to the principal
heads of doctrine; for from these they might easily infer that these
evangelists treat of heavenly mysteries beyond the capacity of man.
Those who have the least particle of candour must be ashamed of
their fastidiousness when they read the first chapter of Luke. Even
our Saviour's discourses, of which a summary is given by these three
evangelists, ought to prevent every one from treating their writings
with contempt. John, again, fulminating in majesty, strikes down
more powerfully than any thunderbolt the petulance of those who
refuse to submit to the obedience of faith. Let all those acute
censors, whose highest pleasure it is to banish a reverential regard
of Scripture from their own and other men's hearts, come forward;
let them read the Gospel of John, and, willing or unwilling, they
will find a thousand sentences which will at least arouse them from
their sloth; nay, which will burn into their consciences as with a
hot iron, and check their derision. The same thing may be said of
Peter and Paul, whose writings, though the greater part read them
blindfold, exhibit a heavenly majesty, which in a manner binds and
rivets every reader. But one circumstance, sufficient of itself to
exalt their doctrine above the world, is, that Matthew, who was
formerly fixed down to his money-table, Peter and John, who were
employed with their little boats, being all rude and illiterate, had
never learned in any human school that which they delivered to
others. Paul, moreover, who had not only been an avowed but a cruel
and bloody foe, being changed into a new man, shows, by the sudden
and unhoped-for change, that a heavenly power had compelled him to
preach the doctrine which once he destroyed. Let those dogs deny
that the Holy Spirit descended upon the apostles, or, if not, let
them refuse credit to the history, still the very circumstances
proclaim that the Holy Spirit must have been the teacher of those
who, formerly contemptible among the people, all of a sudden began
to discourse so magnificently of heavenly mysteries.
12. Add, moreover, that, for the best of reasons, the consent
of the Church is not without its weight. For it is not to be
accounted of no consequence, that, from the first publication of
Scripture, so many ages have uniformly concurred in yielding
obedience to it, and that, notwithstanding of the many extraordinary
attempts which Satan and the whole world have made to oppress and
overthrow it, or completely efface it from the memory of men, it has
flourished like the palm tree and continued invincible. Though in
old times there was scarcely a sophist or orator of any note who did
not exert his powers against it, their efforts proved unavailing.
The powers of the earth armed themselves for its destruction, but
all their attempts vanished into smoke. When thus powerfully
assailed on every side, how could it have resisted if it had trusted
only to human aid? Nay, its divine origin is more completely
established by the fact, that when all human wishes were against it,
it advanced by its own energy. Add that it was not a single city or
a single nation that concurred in receiving and embracing it. Its
authority was recognised as far and as wide as the world extends -
various nations who had nothing else in common entering for this
purpose into a holy league. Moreover, while we ought to attach the
greatest weight to the agreement of minds so diversified, and in all
other things so much at variance with each other - an agreement
which a Divine Providence alone could have produced - it adds no
small weight to the whole when we attend to the piety of those who
thus agree; not of all of them indeed, but of those in whom as
lights God was pleased that his Church should shine.
13. Again, with what confidence does it become us to subscribe
to a doctrine attested and confirmed by the blood of so many saints?
They, when once they had embraced it, hesitated not boldly and
intrepidly, and even with great alacrity, to meet death in its
defence. Being transmitted to us with such an earnest, who of us
shall not receive it with firm and unshaken conviction? It is
therefore no small proof of the authority of Scripture, that it was
sealed with the blood of so many witnesses, especially when it is
considered that in bearing testimony to the faith, they met death
not with fanatical enthusiasm, (as erring spirits are sometimes wont
to do,) but with a firm and constant, yet sober godly zeal. There
are other reasons, neither few nor feeble, by which the dignity and
majesty of the Scriptures may be not only proved to the pious, but
also completely vindicated against the cavils of slanderers. These,
however, cannot of themselves produce a firm faith in Scripture
until our heavenly Father manifest his presence in it, and thereby
secure implicit reverence for it. Then only, therefore, does
Scripture suffice to give a saving knowledge of God when its
certainty is founded on the inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit.
Still the human testimonies which go to confirm it will not be
without effect, if they are used in subordination to that chief and
highest proof, as secondary helps to our weakness. But it is foolish
to attempt to prove to infidels that the Scripture is the Word of
God. This it cannot be known to be, except by faith. Justly,
therefore, does Augustine remind us, that every man who would have
any understanding in such high matters must previously possess piety
and mental peace.
Chapter 9
9. All the principles of piety subverted by fanatics, who substitute
revelations for Scripture.
Sections.
1. The temper and error of the Libertines, who take to themselves
the name of spiritual, briefly described. Their refutation. 1.
The Apostles and all true Christians have embraced the written
Word. This confirmed by a passage in Isaiah; also by the
example and words of Paul. 2. The Spirit of Christ seals the
doctrine of the written Word on the minds of the godly.
2. Refutation continued. 3. The impositions of Satan cannot be
detected without the aid of the written Word. First Objection.
The Answer to it.
3. Second Objection from the words of Paul as to the letter and
spirit. The Answer, with an explanation of Paul's meaning. How
the Spirit and the written Word are indissolubly connected.
1. Those who, rejecting Scripture, imagine that they have some
peculiar way of penetrating to God, are to be deemed not so much
under the influence of error as madness. For certain giddy men have
lately appeared, who, while they make a great display of the
superiority of the Spirit, reject all reading of the Scriptures
themselves, and deride the simplicity of those who only delight in
what they call the dead and deadly letter. But I wish they would
tell me what spirit it is whose inspiration raises them to such a
sublime height that they dare despise the doctrine of Scripture as
mean and childish. If they answer that it is the Spirit of Christ,
their confidence is exceedingly ridiculous; since they will, I
presume, admit that the apostles and other believers in the
primitive Church were not illuminated by any other Spirit. None of
these thereby learned to despise the word of God, but every one was
imbued with greater reverence for it, as their writings most clearly
testify. And, indeed, it had been so foretold by the mouth of
Isaiah. For when he says, "My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words
which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth,
nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's
seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever," he does not tie
down the ancient Church to external doctrine, as he were a mere
teacher of elements; he rather shows that, under the reign of
Christ, the true and full felicity of the new Church will consist in
their being ruled not less by the Word than by the Spirit of God.
Hence we infer that these miscreants are guilty of fearful sacrilege
in tearing asunder what the prophet joins in indissoluble union. Add
to this, that Paul, though carried up even to the third heaven,
ceased not to profit by the doctrine of the law and the prophets,
while, in like manner, he exhorts Timothy, a teacher of singular
excellence, to give attention to reading, (1 Tim. 4: 13.) And the
eulogium which he pronounces on Scripture well deserves to be
remembered, viz., that "it is profitable for doctrine, for reproof,
for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man
of God may be perfect," (2 Tim. 3: 16.) What an infatuation of the
devil, therefore, to fancy that Scripture, which conducts the sons
of God to the final goal, is of transient and temporary use? Again,
I should like those people to tell me whether they have imbibed any
other Spirit than that which Christ promised to his disciples.
Though their madness is extreme, it will scarcely carry them the
length of making this their boast. But what kind of Spirit did our
Saviour promise to send? One who should not speak of himself, (John
16: 13,) but suggest and instil the truths which he himself had
delivered through the word. Hence the office of the Spirit promised
to us, is not to form new and unheard-of revelations, or to coin a
new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received
doctrine of the gospel, but to seal on our minds the very doctrine
which the gospel recommends.
2. Hence it is easy to understand that we must give diligent
heed both to the reading and hearing of Scripture, if we would
obtain any benefit from the Spirit of God, (just as Peter praises
those who attentively study the doctrine of the prophets, (2 Pet. 1:
19,) though it might have been thought to be superseded after the
gospel light arose,) and, on the contrary, that any spirit which
passes by the wisdom of God's Word, and suggests any other doctrine,
is deservedly suspected of vanity and falsehood. Since Satan
transforms himself into an angel of light, what authority can the
Spirit have with us if he be not ascertained by an infallible mark?
And assuredly he is pointed out to us by the Lord with sufficient
clearness; but these miserable men err as if bent on their own
destruction, while they seek the Spirit from themselves rather than
from Him. But they say that it is insulting to subject the Spirit,
to whom all things are to be subject, to the Scripture: as if it
were disgraceful to the Holy Spirit to maintain a perfect
resemblance throughout, and be in all respects without variation
consistent with himself. True, if he were subjected to a human, an
angelical, or to any foreign standard, it might be thought that he
was rendered subordinate, or, if you will, brought into bondage, but
so long as he is compared with himself, and considered in himself,
how can it be said that he is thereby injured? I admit that he is
brought to a test, but the very test by which it has pleased him
that his majesty should be confirmed. It ought to be enough for us
when once we hear his voice; but lest Satan should insinuate himself
under his name, he wishes us to recognise him by the image which he
has stamped on the Scriptures. The author of the Scriptures cannot
vary, and change his likeness. Such as he there appeared at first,
such he will perpetually remain. There is nothing contumelious to
him in this, unless we are to think it would be honourable for him
to degenerate, and revolt against himself.
3. Their cavil about our cleaving to the dead letter carries
with it the punishment which they deserve for despising Scripture.
It is clear that Paul is there arguing against false apostles, (2
Cor. 3: 6,) who, by recommending the law without Christ, deprived
the people of the benefit of the New Covenant, by which the Lord
engages that he will write his law on the hearts of believers, and
engrave it on their inward parts. The letter therefore is dead, and
the law of the Lord kills its readers when it is dissevered from the
grace of Christ, and only sounds in the ear without touching the
heart. But if it is effectually impressed on the heart by the
Spirit; if it exhibits Christ, it is the word of life converting the
soul, and making wise the simple. Nay, in the very same passage, the
apostle calls his own preaching the ministration of the Spirit, (2
Cor. 3: 8,) intimating that the Holy Spirit so cleaves to his own
truth, as he has expressed it in Scripture, that he then only exerts
and puts forth his strength when the word is received with due
honour and respect.
There is nothing repugnant here to what was lately said, (chap.
7) that we have no great certainty of the word itself, until it be
confirmed by the testimony of the Spirit. For the Lord has so knit
together the certainty of his word and his Spirit, that our minds
are duly imbued with reverence for the word when the Spirit shining
upon it enables us there to behold the face of God; and, on the
other hand, we embrace the Spirit with no danger of delusion when we
recognise him in his image, that is, in his word. Thus, indeed, it
is. God did not produce his word before men for the sake of sudden
display, intending to abolish it the moment the Spirit should
arrive; but he employed the same Spirit, by whose agency he had
administered the word, to complete his work by the efficacious
confirmation of the word. In this way Christ explained to the two
disciples, (Luke 24: 27,) not that they were to reject the
Scriptures and trust to their own wisdom, but that they were to
understand the Scriptures. In like manner, when Paul says to the
Thessalonians, "Quench not the Spirit," he does not carry them aloft
to empty speculation apart from the word; he immediately adds,
"Despise not prophesying," (1 Thess. 5: 19, 20.) By this, doubtless,
he intimates that the light of the Spirit is quenched the moment
prophesying fall into contempt. How is this answered by those
swelling enthusiasts, in whose idea the only true illumination
consists, in carelessly laying aside, and bidding adieu to the Word
of God, while, with no less confidence than folly, they fasten upon
any dreaming notion which may have casually sprung up in their
minds? Surely a very different sobriety becomes the children of God.
As they feel that without the Spirit of God they are utterly devoid
of the light of truth, so they are not ignorant that the word is the
instrument by which the illumination of the Spirit is dispensed.
They know of no other Spirit than the one who dwelt and spake in the
apostles--the Spirit by whose oracles they are daily invited to the
hearing of the word.
Calvin, Institutes on the Christian Religion, Volume 1
(continued in part 9...)
---------------------------------------------------
file: /pub/resources/text/ipb-e/epl-04:cvin1-08.txt
.