Calvin’s Institutes

My Favorite Books of 2009

This is a snippet of an email sent to members of the worship team at Lakeview Christian Center – a great bunch of friends and servants, and a fine group of musicians to boot. I try to encourage the team to be “readers of good books”. We want to be a worship team full of people who desire to learn more and more truth about the God we worship, so that we might lead others in God-centered, doctrinally-anchored songs that rise from grateful hearts. We certainly don’t want to worship in a way that we’re simply stringing together tired cliches that say lots about how we feel and precious little about the One we’ve gathered to worship.

So, this little list is from a recent exchange with the team. Since I’ve sent this, they’ve been chiming in one by one to let the other team members know what books have affected them the most this past year. Seeing the solid things they’ve been reading and hearing how it has affected them is a great encouragement to the whole team.

Hopefully, as we’ve talked about before, we are cultivating the art of good reading – first and foremost, God’s Word, but also – and we learn this value from God’s Word – faithful teachers and Christian leaders (whose fruitful labor lives on in books) …

Though not in any particular order, these would be the five best books I read in 2009.

Just Do Something (DeYoung, Kevin)

Pivoters [our ministry to 18-30s] always ask questions about life, marriage, calling, majors, decisions, so I read anything on this topic that I can get my hands on. DeYoung’s book is far and a way the best treatment I’ve come across on the topic of how to discern God’s will. It’s also a perfect book for someone who says “I don’t like to read” since 1) the book is pretty short 2) DeYoung’s writing is solid, engaging, and at several points humorous and 3) every Christian immediately recognizes how relevant this subject is for his/her life.

The Reason For God (Keller, Timothy)

Keller’s defense of Christian faith is beautifully written and cogently argued. He does an excellent job arguing for the biblical worldview and Christian faith as well as deconstructing some of the pillars of 21^st century skepticism. I love Keller’s writing.

Instructing Your Child’s Heart (Tripp, Paul D.)

The re-enacted conversations of how to discipline and correct children with the gospel are alone worth the price of the book.

Keeping Holiday (Meade, Starr)

Meade’s book is a kind of modern day Pilgrim’s Progress. The characters and story development effectively communicate truths like – our inability to fulfill God’s requirements, Christ’s provisions for us, the Christian standing always with “the wind in his face” (opposition to the world, flesh, devil), false promises of sin, the ways that God “speaks” and draws us to Himself, the power of grace, the traps of religion, and more. Short book. I read it to the boys. They begged for more every night. So did I.

The Institutes of the Christian Religion (Calvin, John)

I have tons of quotes from Calvin’s Institutes, but have never gone through the whole thing. It is widely regarded as one of the grandest works of Christian literature in all of church history. All of Calvin’s theology is bathed in Christ-centered devotion. He is no rationalist or dusty theologian. It was a riveting read that brought me to tears on many occasions. His letter to the King of France in 1536 (at the front) is Christian statesmanship par excellence. I trust Calvin’s magnum opus will be on my all time top 10 list when I’m 90, if I’m alive. Ref21 blog has a reading plan that will take you through it in a year. You’ll have to put on your thinking cap, but the journey is well worth the effort.

Filed Under: Books, Calvin's Institutes, Church Life, Spiritual Growth, Theology

Calvin: demonology

Apparently, in Calvin’s time, there was a certain fascination with angels and demons. Still today, many books are written toward discovering the unseen operations of angelic beings. Much of the popular demonology works coming out today, not unlike in Calvin’s time, pile speculation on top of speculation, using obscure texts as hermeneutical ‘keys’ for unlocking ‘truths’ long undiscovered.

As Calvin says, in better words, it’s a whole lot easier to talk about how many angels can dance on the head of a needle than what it means for a Christian to see to it that “no root of bitterness” springs up in our hearts (Heb 12:15). Speculative theology is much more interesting and much less, well, intrusive.

Aurelius Augustine spoke of God’s existence in eternity past, before the world was created. Speculative philosophers quipped “Pray tell, what was He doing all that time?” Like R.C. Sproul (where I first heard this classic quote), Dr. Calvin very much enjoyed Augustine’s response.

“It was a shrewd saying of a good old man, who when some one pertly asked in derision what God did before the world was created, answered he made a hell for the inquisitive (Augustine, Confess. lib. 11 c.12). This reproof, not less weighty than severe, should repress the tickling wantonness which urges many to indulge in vicious and hurtful speculation.” -Institutes, 1.14.1

Calvin wanted theology that conformed to the purpose of God’s self-revelation in Scripture – truths that transform the heart and the mind, truths that are profitable … for training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16-17).

“My care, however, must be to keep within the bound which piety prescribes, lest by indulging in speculations beyond my reach, I bewilder the reader, and lead him away from the simplicity of the faith. And since the Holy Spirit always instucts us in what is useful, but altogether omits, or only touches cursorily on matters which tend little to edification, of all such matters, it certainly is our duty to remain in willing ignorance.” -Institutes, 1.14.3

“Not to dwell on this, let us here remember that on the whole subject of religion one rule of modesty and soberness is to be observed, and it is this: in obscure matters not to speak or think, or even long to know, more than the word of God has delivered. A second rule is, that, in reading the Scriptures, we should constantly direct our inquiries and meditations to those things which tend to edification, not indulge in curiosity, or in studying things of no use. And since the Lord has been pleased to instruct us, not in frivolous questions, but in solid piety, in the fear of his name, in true faith, and the duties of holiness, let us rest satisfied with such knowledge. Wherefore, if we would be duly wise, we must renounce those vain babblings of idle men, concerning the nature, ranks, and number of angels, without any authority from the word of God. I know that many fasten on these topics more eagerly, and take greater pleasure in them than in those relating to daily practice.” -Institutes, 1.14.4

The devil’s created nature:

“But as the devil was created by God, we must remember that this malice which we attribute to his nature is not from creation, but from deprivation. Every thing damnable in him he brought upon himself, by his revolt and fall. Of this Scripture reminds us, lest, by believing that he was so created at first, we should ascribe to God what is most foreign to his nature. For this reason, Christ declares (John 8:44), that Satan, when he lies, “speaketh of his own,” and states the reason, “because he abode not in the truth.”

How far can we probe the matter of how and when Satan became evil?

“But although the expressions are brief and not very explicit, they are amply sufficient to vindicate the majesty of God from every calumny. And what more does it concern us to know of devils? Some murmur because the Scripture does not in various passages give a distinct and regular exposition of Satan’s fall, its cause, mode, date, and nature. But as these things are of no consequence to us, it was better, if not entirely to pass them in silence, at least only to touch lightly upon them.”

What of Satan’s power/authority?

With regard to the strife and war which Satan is said to wage with God, it must be understood with this qualification, that Satan cannot possibly do anything against the will and consent of God…. [the testing of Job, Ahab's deception, tormented King Saul, plagues of Egypt] It is evident therefore that Satan is under the power of God, and is so ruled by His authority, that he must yield obedience to it. Moreover, though we say that Satan resists God, and does works at variance with his works, we at the same time maintain that this contrariety and opposition depend on the permission of God… This much, therefore, he has of himself, and his own iniquity, that he eagerly, and of set purpose, opposes God, aiming at those things which he deems most contrary to the will of God. But as God holds him bound and fettered by the curb of his power, he executes those things only for which permission has been given him, and thus, however unwilling, obeys his Creator, being forced, whenever he is required, to do him service.” -Institutes, 1.14.17

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Dead Guys & History, Spiritual Growth, Theology

Calvin: Trinity, mysteries, & sobriety

When I first began studying doctrines related to Calvin and Calvinism, I was told that Calvin’s theology was more the product of philosophical reasoning than that of reverence for and study of Scripture. Not knowing any better I believed it and, worse, even used it as an argument against Calvin.

Now, having spent hours, as it were, talking with the good Doctor, that assessment is nonsense, pure and simple.

Calvin has a high reverence for Scripture. So high in fact that no matter how it might seem to stand against his feelings, he chooses to call himself a simpleton and believe, instead, whatever it is that God plainly says. Very often, orthodox theology is equated with piety. His study of Scripture is not intellectual fun and games or ivory tower erudition on parade. There is a sense of trembling in every page, especially where we approach the most awesome mysteries like, here, the Trinity.

“Here, if any where, in considering the hidden mysteries of Scripture, we should speculate soberly and with great moderation, cautiously guarding against allowing either our mind or our tongue to go a step beyond the confines of God’s word. For how can the human mind, which hs not yet been able to ascertain of what the body of the sun consists, though it is daily presented to the eye, bring down the boundless essence of God to its little measure? No, how can it, under its own guidance, penetrate to a knowledge of the substance of God whil unable to understand its own? Wherefore, let us willingly leave to God the knowledge of himself. In the words of Hilary (De Trinitate, lib.1), ‘He alone is a fit witness to himself who is known only by himself.’ This knowledge, then, if we would leave to God, we must conceive of him as he has made himself known, and in our inquiries make application to no other quarter than his word… [Decrying the presumption of the sophists] “The very unhappy results of their temerity should be a warning to us to bring more docility than acumen to the discussion ofthis question, never to attempt to search after God anywhere but in his sacred word, and never to speak or think of him farther than we have it for our guide.”" -Institutes, 1.13.21

As pointed out before, Calvin isn’t interested in novel ideas. He is self-consciously indebted to historical theology. After locating and exegeting the relevant biblical texts, he often brings historical theology to bear on the discussion – his favorite voice being, of course, the titanic figure, Aurelius Augustine.

“Moreover, the consent of the ancient fathers clearly appears from this, that in the Council of Nice, no attempt was made by Arius to cloak his heresy by the authority of any approved author; and no Greek or Latin writer apologizes as dissenting from his predecessors. It cannot be necessary to observe how carefully Augustin, to whom all these miscreants are most violently opposed, examined all ancient writings, and how reverently he embraced the doctrine taught by them (Augustine, lib. De Trinit., etc.). He is most scrupulous in stating the grounds on which he is forced to differ from them, even in the minutest point. [footnote goes on...] “Athanasius expresses himself thus learnedly and piously: ‘On the subject, though you cannot explain yourself, you are not therefore to distrust the holy Scriptures. It is better, while hesitating through ignorance, to be silent and believe, than not to believe because you hesitate.” -Institutes, 1.13.29

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Dead Guys & History, Theology

Calvin: God as Triune

I have just begun the fourth and final book in Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion. Unfortunately, however, my effort to record salient points and quotes remains far behind the reading plan – a little over 600 pages, to be specific. At this rate, I’ll still be working on this project 5 years from now. I can think of worse things.

In chapter 13 of Book One, Calvin addresses “the unity of the divine essence in three Persons taught, in Scripture, from the foundation of the world.’ He will treat the meaning of ‘person’, then prove the deity of the Son, then prove the deity of the Holy Spirit. From there, he goes on to refute ‘certain heresies which have arisen.’

God’s immensity is his starting point and a classic concept is helpfully brought to bear on the matter in hand, namely, the idea of anthropomorphism.

“The Anthropomorphites also, who dreamed of a corporeal God, because mouth, ears, eyes, hands, and feet are often ascribed to him in Scripture, are easily refuted. For who is so devoid of intellect as not to understand that God, in so speaking, lisps with us as nurses are wont to do with little children? Such modes of expression, therefore, do not so much express what kind of a being God is, as accommodate the knowledge of Him to our feebleness. In doing so, he must, of course, stoop far below His proper height.” -Institutes, 1.13.1

In paragraph 3, Calvin deals with a perennial problem in defending true faith against, especially, cultists or pseudo-Christian sects. I saw this recently in a debate between two evangelical scholars and two leaders from the United Pentecostal Church. The UPC advocates’ attempted to cut off the use of extra-biblical language. It was a tactic that enabled them to twist the meaning of the biblical terms and get away with it. Given Calvin’s words here, that trick is very old. (In fact, these things have been done much further back still – hear Piper’s biographical sermon on Athanasius). Back to Calvin:

“Now, then, though heretics may snarl … at the word ‘person’ as inadmissable, in consequence of its human origin, since they cannot displace us from our position that three are named, each of whom is perfect God, and yet that there is no plurality of gods, it is most uncandid to attack the terms which do nothing more than explain what the Scriptures declare and sanction. ‘It were better’, they say, ‘to confine not only our meanings but our words within the bounds of Scripture…’ If they call it [that is, the Trinity] a foreign term, because it cannot be pointed out in Scripture in so many syllables, they certainly impose an unjust law – a law which would condemn every interpretation of Scripture that is not composed of other words of Scripture. But if by foreign they mean that which, after being idly devised, is superstitiously defended – which tends more to strife than edification – which is used either out of place, or with no benefit which offends pious ears by its harshness, and leads them away from the simplicity of God’s word, I embrace their soberness with all my heart. For I think we are bound to speak of God as reverently as we are bound to think of Him… But in regard to those parts of Scripture which, to our capacities, are dark and intricate, what forbids us to explain them in clearer terms – terms, however, kept in reverent and faithful subordination to Scripture truth, used sparingly and modestly, and not without occasion?” -Institutes, 1.13.3

Tightening.

“These slippery snakes escape by their swift and tortuous windings, if not strenuously pursued, and when caught, firmly held. Thus when early Christians, when harassed with the disputes which heresies produced, were forced to declare their sentiments in terms most scrupulously exact in order that no indirect subterfuges might remain to ungodly men, to whom ambiguity of expression was a kind of hiding place. Arius confessed that Christ was God, and the Son of God; because the passages of Scripture to this effect were too clear to be resisted, and then, as if he had done well, pretended to concur with others. But, meanwhile, he ceased not to give out that Christ was created, and had a beginning like other creatures. To drag this man of wiles out of his lurking places, the ancient church took a further step, and declared that Christ is the eternal Son of the Father, and consubstantial with the Father… That little word distinguished between Christians of pure faith and the blasphemous Arians.” -Institutes, 1.13.4 (my emphasis)

“Arius says that Christ is God, and then mutters that he was made and had a beginning. He says, that he is one with the Father, but secretly whispers in the ears of his party, made one, like other believers, though with special privilege. Say He is consubstantial and you immediately pluck the mask from this chameleon, though you add nothing to Scripture.” -Institutes, 1.13.5

More soon, I hope.

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Church Life, Dead Guys & History, Theology

Calvin: On images and worship

In Book 1, chapters 11 and 12, Calvin stands against the “impiety of attributing a visible form to God.” So, down with the use of images, statues, paintings with any representations of God. For a more contemporary defense of this same notion, see J.I. Packer, Knowing God (don’t remember which chapter; close to the front). Calvin also argues for what would later be called the regulative principle.

Here goes.

“[Comments from Ps 115:4; 135:15] There was ground, therefore, for the sarcasm of the heathen poet (Horace, Satirae I.8), ‘I was once the trunk of a fig tree, a useless log, when the tradesman, uncertain whether he should make me a stool, etc., chose rather that I should be a god.’” -1.11.4

“Indeed brothels exhibit their inmates more chastely and modestly dressed than churches do images intended to represent virgins.” -1.11.7

Aha, here’s the famous C.J. Mahaney quote about the heart being an idol factory. Incidentally, one of the side benefits of reading through the Institutes is that I’m now able to locate so many long-treasured Calvin quotes that I have picked up second hand over the last 15 or so years.

“Hence we may infer, that the human mind is, so to speak, a perpetual forge of idols.” -1.11.8

The following quote explains the reaction of the people in a previous post.

“After such a figment is formed, adoration forthwith ensues: for when once men imagined that they beheld God in images, they also worshipped him as being there…. They say, we do not call them our gods. Not did either the Jews or gentiles of old so call them; and yet the prophets never ceased to charge them with their adulteries with wood and stone for the very acts which are daily done by those who would be deemed Christians, namely, for worshiping God carnally in wood and stone.” -1.11.9-10

Contrary to at least one noted scholarly opinion (whom I won’t name since I have yet, first hand, to find him in print on this), the Regulative Principle, in concept, was not a 17th century invention.

“The nature of the worship which God requires will be seen in its own place (2.7-8). He has been pleased to prescribe in his law what is lawful and riht and thus restrict men to a certain rule, lest any should allow themselves to devise a worship of their own.” -1.12.2

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Church Life, Dead Guys & History, Theology

10 Reasons to Read Calvin

I’ve fallen behind again and am playing some serious catchup on my reading-through-Calvin’s Institutes-in-a-year-mission. Evan May is reading it as well and keeping me accountable. At least once a week we’ll have an office to office (our desks are fairly close) chat about what we’re getting out of the latest reading installments.

This morning I was reading Calvin’s understanding of the Lord’s Prayer. He demonstrates the excellency of the prayer and shows how, taken in its broadest contours, it is THE quintessential prayer of Scripture. Its compass is large enough to account for all other biblically prescribed prayers. In other words, there is not a prayer we can lawfully pray (that is, if we are concerned to pray in keeping with how God says we are to approach Him in prayer) that does not fall under one of the six petitions of the Lord’s Prayer. If that is an intriguing thesis to you, pick up a copy of the Institutes and consider the case Calvin makes.

Here are 10 good reasons, given by Dr. Ligon Duncan, to read Calvin.

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Dead Guys & History, Spiritual Growth

Good works, not optional

I’m still reading through Calvin’s Institutes – trying to keep up with the Reformation21 blog-challenge to read it through this year. It has been a remarkably edifying time for me.

The goal, early on, was to keep up with typing in quotes that have stood out. I’ve fallen way behind! I was helped by Ref21 blogger, Justin Taylor, who helped repackage Calvin’s arguments about the age old controversy of works and faith with respect to justification and the judgment seat of Christ.

Not surprisingly, the caricatures of John Calvin advancing an antinomianism fall flat if one reads through the section that Calvin-in-a-year readers are reading right now.

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Dead Guys & History, Spiritual Growth, Theology

Calvin: 1.9: Word and Spirit, never separate

Calvin couldn’t stomach the notion of separating the Spirit from the Word in such a way that personal revelations were treated as Scripture. The ‘libertines’ who entertained this error in Calvin’s day, called their position ‘spiritual’. They would say that Calvin was arguing in favor of a ‘dead letter’ over the Spirit. Calvin’s response follows.

“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… [Isaiah 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… 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.” -Institutes, 1.9.1

“But they say that it is insulting to subject the Spirit, to whom all thigns 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 respect without variation consistent with himself… It ought to be enough for us when once we hear his voice; but lest Satin should insinuate himself under his name, he wishes us to recognize him by the image which he has stamped on the Scriptures. The author of the Scriptures cannot vary, and change his likeness. Sush as he there appeared at first, such he will perpetually remain… The Holy Spirit so cleaves to his own truth, as he has expresed it in Scripture, that he then only exerts and puts forth his strength when the Word is received with due honor and respect.” -Institutes, 1.9.2-3

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Spiritual Growth

Calvin: 1.8.13: Scripture's self-attestation

Before moving on to chapter 9, here’s another great quote from book 1, chapter 8 on Scripture’s self-attesting power.

“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, therefor, 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 is 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.” -Institutes, 1.8.13

Filed Under: Calvin's Institutes, Spiritual Growth

Calvin: 1.7-1.8.1: Scripture's self-attestation

Ever heard the argument – if the Church determined the canon of Scripture, then surely the Church stands above Scripture. Calvin sets up the dilemma this way, “… that Scripture is of importance only insofar as conceded to it by the suffrage of the church; as if the eternal and inviolable truth of God could depend on the will of men.” He continues, “With great insult to the Holy Spirit, it is asked, who can assure us that the Scriptures proceeded from God.” (1.7.1)

Some of my favorite theologians/scholars – many of whom hold Calvin in high regard – do not agree with him on some of the points I’ll quote below. They are not friends of so-called presuppositional apologetics. It’s too circular. We need to start on some agreed-upon common ground: in comes the law of non-contradiction, the basic reliability of sense perception, the basic reliability of the New Testament, the historicity of Jesus, etc. Inch by inch it moves its way toward full expression of faith in Christ and the truthfulness of the Scriptures, and does so (purportedly) without circularity.

Calvin is not averse to circularity and contends for the self-attesting authority of the Bible.

“These ravings are admirably refuted by a single expression of an apostle. Paul testifies that the church is ‘built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets’ (Eph 2:20). If the doctrine of the apostles and prophets is the foundation of the church, the former must have had its certainty before the latter began to exist… For if the Christian church was founded at first on the writings of the prophets, and the preaching of the apostles, that doctrine, wheresoever it may be found, was certinly ascertained and sanctioned antecedently to the church, since, but for this, the church herself never could have existed. Nothing, therefore, can be more absurd than the fiction, that the power of judging Scripture is in the church, and that on her nod its certainty depends. When the church receives it, and gives it the stamp of her authority, she does not make that authentic which was otherwise doubtful or controverted but, acknowledging it as the truth of God, she, as in duty bound, shows her reverence by an unhesitating assent. As to the questions, How shall we be persuaded that it came from God without recurring to a decree of the church? it is just the same as if it were asked, How shall we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? Scripture bears upon the face of it as clear evidence of its truth, as white and black do of their color, sweet and bitter of their taste.” -Institutes, 1.7.2

“It is necessary to attend to what I lately said, that our faith in doctrine is not established until we have a perfect conviction that God is its author. Hence, the highest proof of Scripture is uniformly taken from the character of him whose word it is. The prophets and apostles boast not their own acuteness or any qualities which win credit to speakers, nor do they dwell on reasons; but they appeal to the sacred name of God, in order that the whole world may be compelled to submission…. 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…. We shall see a little farther on, that the volume of sacred Scripture very far surpasses all other writings. No, if we look at it with clear eyes, and unblessed judgment, it will forthwith present itself with a divine majesty which will subdue our presumptuous opposition, and force us to do it homage…. 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. The same Spirit, therefore, who spoke by the mouth of the prophets, must penetrate our hearts, in order to convince us that they faithfully delivered the message with which they were divinely entrusted.” -Institutes, 1.7.4

“Let it therefore be held as fixed that those who are inwardly taught by the Holy Spirit acquiesce implicitly in Scripture; that Scripture carrying its own evidence along with it, deigns not to submit to proofs and arguments, but owes the full conviction with which we ought to receive it to the testimony of the Spirit. Enlightened by him, we no longer believe, either on our own judgment or that of others, that the Scriptures are from God; but, in a way superior to human judgment, feel perfectly assured – as much so as if we beheld the divine image visibly impressed on it – that it came to us, by the instrumentality of men, from the very mouth of God.” -Institutes, 1.7.5

“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 judgment can give. Till this better foundation has been laid, the authority of Scripture remains in suspense. On the other hand, when recognizing 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.” -Institutes, 1.8.1

If you want to spend more time considering this whole idea, you can get it with wonderful clarity and force in Grudem’s Systematic Theology, part 1. I don’t remember the exact chapter at the moment, but it’s in there somewhere and it’s very helpful.

You might also check out John Piper’s biographical sermon on Calvin, which is good for many reasons – one of them being that Piper effectively unpacks this attribute of Scripture combining Calvin’s thinking with his own.

Filed Under: Apologetics, Calvin's Institutes, Dead Guys & History, Spiritual Growth, Theology

Links