“It has pleased God in every economy of his covenants to confirm by some sacred symbols, o   the certainty of his promises to remind man of his duty…” This definition of Sacrament is similar to and in some ways, I would say superior to the definition in the Westminster shorter Catechism:

Q. 92 What is a Sacrament?

A. A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ; wherein, by sensible signs, Christ and the benefits of the new covenant, are represented, sealed, and applied to believers.

In the catechism the divines focused on Christ as the giver of sacraments. This definition works for the two sacraments of the New Testament, viz. baptism and the Lord’s Supper. However, Christ is the name in the confession and catechisms for the Incarnate Son of God, and as such since there were sacraments prior to the incarnation, question 98 more closely read would refer to the definition of the sacraments of the Covenant of Grace under “the time of the gospel” (cf. WCF VII. 5).

Witsius argue that the most wise, almighty God was pleased that in every covenantal administration there should be such signs that point to both the promises of that covenantal administration and the duties added thereunto.

God has thus appointed to represent before his eyes those things which are pledges of the greatest blessings. He gives four purposes for God’s appointment of the sacraments:

1. God’s revelation is proposed for man’s accurate consideration by the signs. In other words, instead God being content to merely give “oracles from heaven.” He was pleased to give signs which point to the heart of that revelation. God spoke and to give “teeth” as it were to his words he gives these signs and seals of his words.
2. Tend to confirm our faith. Man by his embodied form needs tactile reinforcers to understand. God thus chooses appropriate signs which point to the truth of what the oracles from heaven have declared that man may have the constant (“nearly daily” is Witsius’ exact wording) reminder and encouragement of the trustworthiness of God’s promises.
3. By means of this institution a holy man does by the sight, touch and taste, of the sacred symbols attain to some sense of eternal blessings, and accustoms himself under the symbols to a contemplation and foretaste of these things to the plenary and immediate fruition of which he will one time or other be admitted w/o outward signs. “Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but a desire fulfilled is a tree of life,” (Pro 13:12). In the sacrament God gives a foretaste of that deferred hope which God has set before him.
4. In them man has something to continually remind him of his duty—“they put him in mind of those very strong obligations, by which he is bound to his Covenant-God.”

Using this expanded definition of sacrament Witsius identified four Sacraments that God gave in the Covenant of Works. He then treats each one by examining first, what good they signified and seal to man; and second, what duty and obligation they remind him of. At this point he makes a caveat in dealing with the sacraments of the Covenant of Works.

1. Paradise (i.e. a special Garden)
2. The Tree of Life
3. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil
4. The Sabbath

These sacraments unlike all of them in the Covenant of Grace, do not point to Christ or a mediator, for Adam was responsible to fulfill the covenant stipulations, whereas in the Covenant of Grace the elect require a Surety to fulfill the covenant stipulations. So for example in treating of the relationship of the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in 1.6.20 he cites unfavorably Jerome Zanchius likening of the Tree of Life to the Gospel and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as the Law. Witsius concedes that looking back postlapsum at the trees one may see an apposite fitness to this imagery, but it would not have been that which God signified to Adam by these two sacraments.

(In this post we will examine only the first in detail

Following Witsius’ method, the first question to be answered vis-à-vis paradise is, what good is signified? God intended Adam to look at his environs and to seek the better country. God was representing to Adam that glorious abode with God where God would always be in the midst of his elect not visiting as it were. Witsius develops eight analogies between paradise and heaven:

1. 1. Both are made and prepared by God for man’s habitation. As such the garden of God was the good gift in which man could thrive, yet it was not the final abode and heaven will perfectly fit his needs.
   2. As paradise surpassed all the rest of the earth in excellency so shall the New Heavens and New Earth excel all other abodes and will cinduce to the greater glory of God and felicity of man.
   3. The rivers of paradise are perfect for the growth of life and man in submission go God. The River which makes glad the heart of man which flows forth from Zion will serve for the watering of all creation. Moreover as part of the imagery of the river of life is that no more shall the altar in Zion be used to propitiate God, the water is clear and man shall have life with no need to make peace with God, for God brought an end to the war between God and the elect.
   4. The precious stones we read of in the garden demonstrate the fitness of the region for human industry done for the glory of God. The far surpassing riches of heaven are such that every need shall be met and there will be no lack.
   5. In paradise God planted two trees to choose from. Both trees pointed to the manner in which man was to live before God. In heaven many trees of life abound which all point to the eternal felicity between God and man. These trees demonstrate that abundant life is waiting for God’s elect.
   6. In Genesis 2 we see man created then he was placed in garden which was in Eden. Psalm 1 has similar imagery. The righteous man is transplanted to the streams of living water, which again parallels the translation of the elect from the old heavens and earth to the New Heavens and earth.
   7. Only innocent man was fit for paradise, so only purified man shall be fit for heaven
   8. Man had familiar fellowship with God in paradise. God walked in the midst of the garden-temple. In the New Creation there will be no temple for God is in their midst.” and will have intimate fellowship in heaven

As we move from what God presented to Adam for his belief we must now answer the question: what duty did paradise signify for man?

First, Adam was to seek a greater happiness, viz. the immediate fruition of God’s presence in Creation. As Adam looked at the creation he was to thank his Creator for the good gifts and not to seek his felicity in the gifts. As Augustine millennia later stated:

My sin consisted in this, that I sought pleasure, sublimity, and truth not in God but in his creatures, in myself and other created beings. So it was that I plunged into miseries, confusions, and errors. My God, I give thanks to you, my source of sweet delight, and my glory and my confidence. I thank you for your gifts.” Augustine, Confessions I. xx (31)

Again as we look at the sin-list of Romans 1 we see that God places a lack of thankfulness as the overarching heading for the spiral of thorns and thistles he lists there.

God takes not pleasure in idleness, but in active industry. We see this in the positive command that God gives to Adam upon his translation to the Garden. He is commanded to work (עבד) and to keep (שמר) it. These are not passive verbs (and in fact if you look at chapter 3 of Genesis part of Adam’s culpability in the abrogation of the Covenant of Works was his passivity in protecting (שמר) Eve from the deception of the Serpent. Witsius derives five duties for which paradise ought to have served as a reminder.

First the beauty of the environs ought to keep heaven continually in his thoughts. Second, only he that labors and does that which is acceptable to God can get to heavenly habitation. Here is at the heart of and strongest of Witsius’ convictions from a Biblical perspective. Given that fallen man has perverted all of God’s good gifts, he has also perverted the proper balance or work and labor. We live in a society that prizes leisure above all and as such we do not know true rest or true labor. Yet in the Garden, God is revealing to Adam the appropriate balance where he is to labor for six days and rest one. This balance shows that God does not countenance laziness, nor does he countenance workaholicism. In seminary, one pastor came as a guest lecture and boasted that he took off one day in 21, and scheduled his family in for half an hour a day. This is just as out of balance and sinful as the person who never works and when he is at his place of employment does not engage in what he is being gainfully employed to do. In the garden and its appropriate labors, God is demonstrating the appropriate way that man is to live in covenant with God.

The next two focus on the command to guard or keep. Third, positively, God instructed Adam to keep his soul for God as a lovely garden. While he positively fulfilled his duties man is to keep his own self as well. This is part and parcel of the command. For as he does his duty Adam is including himself in these labors, keeping a right frame toward God so that he might continue in a harmonious relationship with his Creator. This means that he is to maintain his loyalty toward God in himself

Fourth, Adam is to guard his soul from wild beasts of lust. As he maintains the garden of his heart he is also to prevent the invasion of invaders of the Garden. When the serpent began his temptation, Adam as guardian ought to have slain the invader and protected his wife, the garden, and creation. This command precludes a passive acquiescence to sin and temptation, but demanded a ruthless war against all that would oppose itself to the Creator.

Fifth, the gift of paradise enjoined him not do anything against God. This encapsulates those sins of omission and commission. He is not to prefer anything illicit, for as his Creator lovingly formed Adam and placed him in the Garden so too he knew that which was best for him. This trust in God’s felicity was paramount for the maintenance of the Suzerain-Vasal relationship, and upon abrogation of this relationship by Adam, it brought about the war of the heavens and the earth, in which only one would be victor and it was not the creature.

I journey forth rejoicing
From this dark vale of tears
To heavenly joy and freedom
From earthly bonds and fears
Where Christ our Lord shall gather
All His redeemed again,
His kingdom to inherit–
Goodnight, goodnight till then

Why thus so sadly weeping
Beloved ones of my heart?
The Lord is good and gracious
Though now He bids us part
Oft have we met in gladness
And we shall meet again
All sorrow left behind us–
Goodnight, goodnight till then

I go to see His glory
Whom we have loved below
I go, the blessed angels
The holy saints to know.
Our lovely ones departed
I go to find again
And wait for you to join us–
Goodnight, goodnight till then

I hear the Savior calling–
The joyful hour has come
The angel-guards are ready
To guide me to our home
Where Christ our Lord shall gather
All His redeemed again,
His kingdom to inherit–
Goodnight, goodnight till then

By this means Eutyches, who seemed to be deserving of honour under the title of Presbyter, is now shown to be exceedingly thoughtless and sadly inexperienced. . . If, then, he knew not what he ought to think about the incarnation of the Word of God, and was not willing for the sake of obtaining the light of intelligence, to make laborious search through the whole extent of the Holy Scriptures, he should at least have received with heedful attention that general Confession common to all, whereby the whole body of the faithful profess that “they believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was born of the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary.” By which three clauses the engines of almost all heretics are shattered.

(HT: Wes White)

The sum of the Covenant of Redemption is this: God having freely chosen unto life a certain number of lost mankind; for the glory of his rich grace, did give them, before the world began, unto God the Son, appointed Redeemer; that, upon condition he would humble himself so far as to assume the human nature, of a soul and a body, unto personal union with his divine nature, and submit himself to the law, as surety for them, and satisfy justice for them, by giving obedience in their name, even unto the suffering of the cursed death of the cross, he should ransom and redeem them all from sin and death, and purchase unto them righteousness and eternal life, with all saving graces leading thereunto, to be effectually, by means of his own appointment, applied in due time to every one of them. This condition the Son of God (who is Jesus Christ our Lord) did accept before the world began, and in the fulness of time came into the world, was born of the Virgin Mary, subjected himself to the law, and completely paid the ransom on the cross: But by virtue of the foresaid bargain, made before the world began, he is in all ages, since the fall of Adam, still upon the work of applying actually the purchased benefits unto the elect; and that he doth by way of entertaining a covenant of free grace and reconciliation with them, through, faith in himself; by which covenant, he makes over to every believer a right and interest to himself, and to all his blessings.

Herman Witsius (1636-1708) speaks to this and sides with Calvin. In the first chapter of Practice of Christianity, he sets forth the doctrine of Scripture. While many have complained in the last century of starting theological treatises with a doctrine of Scripture. Richard Muller’s magisterial Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics gives the reason why all protestant theology has started out this way, viz. Scripture is the principium cognoscendi externum and therefore one only has a need to listen in so far as one starts with the proper pillars. Namely that the transcendent, Triune God (principium essendi) exists and has spoken.

Witsius identifies five “principle marks of divine inspiration that are so clear and evident in Holy Scripture.”

1. “there are a great number of definite predictions of things that were quite uncertain (in relation to second causes) and depended on the free will of men, which after many years happened exactly as predicted in Holy Scripture in all their circumstances.”
2. “the perfect holiness and excellence of the commandments which are contained in it.”
3. “the profound and marvelous mysteries that “no eye has seen, no ear has heard, and which have not entered into the mind of man” (1 Cor. 2:9).”
4. “the simple and yet powerful and touching way in which it explains things so that it penetrates the heart of an attentive reader (Heb. 4:12) and causes him to see the finger of God in them just as much as in the miracles that were performed to confirm Holy Scripture.”
5. “the beautiful harmony and agreement of the diverse parts and teachings that compose Holy Scripture, even though they were written by various authors in different languages, places, and times.”

This is where Warfield and many who came after have stopped. They have set forward these five elements are part of them and seen them as sufficient. They are not. They are necessary, but while they Scriptures are the principium cognoscendi externum, apart from the Holy Spirit working on the individual they are not sufficient. The operation of the Holy Spirit as the principium cognoscendi internum is where Witsius and Calvin are better than Warfield. Here is Witsius again:

The proofs that we have just recounted have their own strength to produce a bare persuasion and an historical faith in the inspiration of Scripture, but they can do nothing more. In order for them to be received with a saving faith, the Holy Spirit must bring the power of these proofs to life in the soul by working with these proofs. He must illuminate the elect for them to see properly in a spiritual manner the perfect holiness of Scripture (Ps. 119:18), taste their inexpressible sweetness (Ps. 39:9), and understand clearly and distinctly the doctrines that have a particular connection with salvation so that they see them, as it were, before their eyes. When the Holy Spirit works in this way, they are firmly resolved to take them for divine rules of their faith and conduct.

I commend to your reading the writings of Witsius. Warfield has much to say on this that is important, but on this one subject the necessity of the internal witness of the Holy Spirit he seems to have not been clear enough.

Jesus lives, and reigns supreme,
And, his kingdom still remaining,
I shall also be with him,
Ever living, ever reigning.
God has promised: be it must:
Jesus is my Hope and Trust.

Jesus lives, and by his grace,
Vict’ry o’er my passions giving,
I will cleanse my heart and ways,
Ever to his glory living.
Me he raises from the dust.
Jesus is my Hope and Trust.

Jesus lives, I know full well
Nought from him my heart can sever,
Life nor death nor powers of hell,
Joy nor grief, hence forth forever.
None of all his saints is lost;
Jesus is my Hope and Trust.

Jesus lives, and death is now
But my entrance into glory.
Courage, then, my soul, for thou
Hast a crown of life before thee;
Thou shalt find thy hopes were just;
Jesus is the Christian’s Trust.

Jesus, er mein Heiland, lebt; ich werd auch das Leben schauen,
Sein, wo mein Erlöser schwebt; warum sollte mir denn grauen?
Lässet auch ein Haupt sein Glied, welches es nicht nach sich zieht?

Ich bin durch der Hoffnung Band zu genau mit ihm verbunden,
Meine starke Glaubenshand wird in ihn gelegt befunden,
Daß mich auch kein Todesbann ewig von ihm trennen kann.

Ich bin Fleisch und muß daher auch einmal zu Asche werden;
Das gesteh’ ich, doch wird er mich erwecken aus der Erden,
Daß ich in der Herrlichenkeit um ihn sein mög allezeit.

Dieser meiner Augen Licht wird ihn, meinen Heiland, kennen,
Ich, ich selbst, ein Fremder nicht, werd in seiner Liebe brennen;
Nur die Schwachheit um und an wird von mir sein abgetan.

Was hier kranket, seufzt und fleht, wird dort frisch und herrlich gehen;
Irdisch werd ich ausgesät, himmlisch werd ich auferstehen.
Alle Schwachheit, Angst und Pein wird von mir genommen sein.

Seid getrost und hocherfreut, Jesus trägt euch, sein Glieder.
Gebt nicht statt der Traurigkeit: sterbt ihr, Christus ruft euch wieder,
Wenn die letzt Posaun erklingt, die auch durch die Gräber dringt.

The law could promise life to me,
If my obedience perfect be;
But grace does promise life upon
My Lord’s obedience alone.

The law says, Do, and life you’ll win;
But grace says, Live, for all is done;
The former cannot ease my grief,
The latter yields me full relief.

The law will not abate a mite,
The gospel all the sum will quit;
There God in thret’nings is array’d
But here in promises display’d.

The law excludes not boasting vain,
But rather feeds it to my bane;
But gospel grace allows no boasts,
Save in the King, the Lord of Hosts.

The law brings terror to molest,
The gospel gives the weary rest;
The one does flags of death display,
The other shows the living way.

The law’s a house of bondage sore,
The gospel opens prison doors;
The first me hamer’d in its net,
The last at freedom kindly set.

An angry God the law reveal’d
The gospel shows him reconciled;
By that I know he was displeased,
By this I see his wrath appeased.

The law still shows a fiery face,
The gospel shows a throne of grace;
There justice rides alone in state,
But here she takes the mercy-seat.

Lo! in the law Jehovah dwells,
But Jesus is conceal’d;
Whereas the gospel’s nothing else
But Jesus Christ reveal’d.

Both these facts require an explanation — the relative quiescence of the idea in the New Testament as a whole, no less than its sudden activity in Hebrews. It seems strange at first that a conception which plays so dominant a role in the Old Testament and so strongly colors the representation of religion there should have found so little employment in the later stage of revelation. The cause is usually sought in this, that other ideas like the Kingdom of God and the Church have forced it into the background and taken its place. But this is rather a fuller statement of the problem, and only in so far of help towards the solution, than the solution itself. For the question persists: Why did other ideas, and precisely these ideas, become so dominant as to relegate the διαθηκη-idea to semi-oblivion? To this question the answer can only be found in the momentous change to which in the development of redemption and revelation the general character of religion became subject. Through the coming of the Messiah and the accomplishment of His work the people of God received a Messianic organization; their whole constitution and manner of life became determined by their relation to the Christ. Now the Old Testament idea of the ברית, had in the long course of its history, scarcely come as yet into fructifying contact with the Messianic hope of Israel. Therefore at the dawn of the new dispensation it was not prepared to take the lead in the great rearrangement of doctrinal values characteristic of this epoch. While inherently not incapable of entering upon an organic union with the Messianic point of view, yet on the surface it did not suggest or invite such an interrelation. It will be remembered that the great prophecy of Jeremiah concerning the new ברית which Jehovah will make with Israel in the future is not Messianically oriented. A definite, specific historical situation was required to draw this ancient idea into the service of the new Messianic outlook created by the appearance of Jesus and the accomplishment of His work.*

____

* Geerhardus Vos, “Hebrews, The Epistle of the διαθηκη,” The Princeton Theological Review 13 (1915): 587-632. Available here.

“If indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the Gospel, which you heard, which has been heralded in all creation under heave, of which I Paul was made a minister.”

This past Sunday as I was teaching through Leviticus, one of the questions directed me to respond with the words, “if you endure to the end you will be saved.” While that is a quote from elsewhere, the issue still arises, upon whom is the apodosis dependent. While the initial derive from one’s theological presuppositions a little thought is in order.

First as we examine the verb ἐπιμένετε in its other 17 uses in the LXX and NT we see that the uses carries the connotation of remaining or continuing, only in five of Paul’s uses does it mean more than remaining at a particular geographical location (viz. Rom 6:1; 11:22-23; Phil 1:24; Col 1:23; 1 Tim 4:16).
In order to answer the question of whom the perseverance depends up, it seems necessary to examine the participles that modify ἐπιμένετε τῇ πίστει. The first to examine is τεθεμελιωμένοι (θεμελιόω). In the NT, this verb occurs five times (Matt 7:25; E[h 3:17; Col 1:23; Heb 1:10; and 1 Pet 5:10). Ephesians 3:17 is illustrative of the other uses. κατοικῆσαι τὸν Χριστὸν διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν, ἐν ἀγάπῃ ἐρριζωμένοι καὶ τεθεμελιωμένοι. One should view the two halves of this verse as a synonymous parallelism (See my earlier post on Ephesians 6:4 for another use of parallelism in Ephesians).

A κατοικῆσαι τὸν Χριστὸν διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν,

B ἐν ἀγάπῃ ἐρριζωμένοι καὶ τεθεμελιωμένοι,

Here Paul is praying that Christ might dwell in the hearts of the Ephesians by faith. The second half describes the manner of that dwelling, rooted and founded in love. Here we see the perfect passive participle of θεμελιόω. Christ is to dwell rooted and established by love. The two times that θεμελιόω occurs in the active voice. Hebrews and 1 Peter God is the subject of the verb. Whereas in the passive uses it describes the manner of the Christians continued perserverance. It seems that these passive verbs should be viewed as divine passives. In other words in Ephesians 3:17B one could render it God root you and establish you in love. And in Colossians 1:23 one should render the verse so far as “If you continue in the faith of which God has sunk sure unsinkable foundations…”

The next participle is μετακινούμενοι  the present passive participle of μετακινέω. Mετακινέω only occurs here in the NT. In the LXX, it occurs seven times with variegated connotations all of which describe a disordered retreat or surreptitious movement of boundary markers. One suggestive use is Deut 32:30 which describes how with the Rock of Israel’s help two put a myriad to flight. One can sees that μετακινέω in 1:23 almost takes on a judicial overtone such that those who do not have Christ as the one who established the foundation will not stay stead fast. Those in whom Christ does not dwell by faith will be set to flight as the enemies of God.

Therefore since the participles that modify "if you remain in the faith..." depend on God’s action, one must provide a strong case for leaving the action, "abiding" in the hands of the Colossians, and by extension the members of the church today. It is for this reason that the abiding here is in fact a preservation of those who are in Christ. The answer to the question, “How do I know I am saved?” according to verse 23 is "I am continuing to trust in the Gospel as my only hope." How then do you know that you are continuing to hope that the Gospel is your only hope?

I was struck by the two clauses:

αφ’ ής ήμερας ήκουσατε

and

επεγνωτε την χαριν του θεου εν αληθεια

Two things struck me. 1) The relationship of these clauses and 2) the difference it makes.

BDAG states in its entry for  επιγνωσκω in reference to Colossians 1:6:  “… here ε. is the second stage after ακουειν…” Second stage of what? While BDAG does not elucidate what it means as one examines the context of Colossians it becomes obvious that what is being discussed is the apprehension of the Effectual Call. In other words, one hears the Gospel preached, and then one comes to this understanding of the Grace of God. How, in truth or one comes to apprehend it in a manner that accords with truth.

This relationship separates Christianity from many of the impostors that can be grouped under bland spiritualities.  While the various impostors do not have an organic connection to one another, these false religions have the general error of believing that one has an unmediated encounter with God apart from the intellect. God has ordained that He must be approached through a particular means, namely the preaching of the Word. Christianity is a logo-centric religion. This reflects the very character of the Triune God. He desires to be worshiped in Spirit and Truth. That means that the Word must be heard and apprehended in truth; in order for the Gospel to bear fruit and grow.

These two thoughts are not earth shattering in the sense that they merely reflect the teaching of Scripture and the Reformation tradition (actually one could say Western Christianity more broadly). However given that we live in an age that prizes the immediate, mystical experience at the expense of God’s ordained means for the proclamation and spread of the Gospel it is worth being said.