ST1_TheDoctrineofGod

7/25/2019 ST1_TheDoctrineofGod

1/41

The Doctrine of God

Lecture Outline

John M. Frame

This lecture outline is more or less a summary of my book Doctrine of God(P&! "##"$. Lar%e oman numerals corresond to chater titles.

'. 'ntroduction. God in our a%e

). '%norance!". luralism!*. +ei%htlessness

,. The Doctrine of God in -istory

1. More hilosohical influence on this locus than on others.2. eformation did not drastically reise this one as some others.3. /uinas0 SummaContra Gentiless. 1alin0s Institutes.4. Protestant scholasticism2 critici3ed as

a. nit4ickin%! focused on minutiae.b. 5eculatie! hilosohical! rather than biblical.c. 'rreleant to the ractical 1hristian life.

5. lternaties to scholasticisma. 5chleiermacher! 6ierke%aard! ,arth.b. Pietism! anabatism! charismatics.c. eformed

(i$ 7aryin% the order of toics(ii$ Dooye+eerd2 relace scholastic hilosohy +ithDooye+eerdian

(iii$ edemtie history(i$ dotin% controllin% motifs2 loe! 8ord! Fatherhood of

God! hoe! liberation! community.($ 7an Til2 5ola 5critura as resuosition.

1. My esonse to 5cholasticism). 5ola 5critura! s. Philosohical 'merialism and Traditionalism". 1oenant Lordshi! to focus on the central biblical messa%e2 9:.

;22)#! ?2)@! "?4*#! )#2"! )@2@! )>! );2)".*. 1han%es in order of toics to facilitate communication.

a. To reflect a biblical attern of reasonin%.b. To be less h%ilosohical! more historical.c. To emhasi3e that the ethical attributes are fundamental.d. Aot Btheolo%y from belo+C as usually understood.

D. 5tructure of These Lectures). 1oenant Lordshi of God

a. holy erson +ho is head of the coenant.

)


2/41

b. 1ontrol! authority! resence.". 5ome roblem areas

a. -uman resonsibility and freedomb. 9il

*. hilosohy of Lordshi

a. ethicsb. eistemolo%yc. metahysics

@. The narratie of God0s actionsa. miracleb. roidencec. creationd. the decrees

=. uthoritatie descritions of Goda. Aamesb. ima%es

c. attributes(i$ loe(ii$ kno+led%e(iii$ o+er

;. The Trinitarian Personsa. God as three in oneb. The deity of the three ersonsc. The theolo%y of the Trinity

Part One: Yahweh the Lord

''. The Lord. 1entrality of Lordshi

). Bah+eh is Lord!C the center of the OT messa%e. 9:. *2)@4)=!Deut. ;2@4=! 9:. ;22)#! ""! ?2)@! "?4*#! )#2"! )@2@!)>! );2;! )"! etc. 1f. 9:. ?2);! om. ?2)"


3/41

*. -oliness God0s caacity and ri%ht to arouse our reerent a+e and+onder.

@. ,rin%s a+areness of our sin! 'sa. ;2=.=. ,ut ama3in%ly! he calls us to be his holy nation! 9:. )?2;! ""2*)!

Le. )?2)! ) Pet. )2);! om. )2

(i$ General2 e:clusie coenant loyalty! Bloe.C(ii$ 5ecific commands.

d. 5anctions(i$ blessin%s for obedience(ii$ curses for disobedience

e. 1oenant continuity! administration.*. The treaty is a +ritten document! authored by the Lord.

a. 1f. BDoctrine of the 8ordCb. God %ies 'srael a +ritten constitution.

@. 'n Ae+ 1oenant! he is Lord oer many nations.=. 'ndeed! God is coenant Lord oer the +hole creation! Psm. *;2=4

@". 9:. "#2)4)2)"! @;2*[email protected] Hu!

B' am he.C=. Psm. )*=2)*! 'sa. ";2@4>! -os. )"2@4?! )*2@! Mal. *2;.;. The ' ams of John.

a. B' am theHC ;2@>! >2)"! ?2=! )#22"@! ">! )*2)?! )>2=4>.c. B' M!C >2=>.

! @2>! ))2)

*


4/41

1. The 1oenantal Triad). 1ontrol! authority! resence". Parallel +ith elements of the su3erainty treaty.

D. ah+eh the 1ontroller). 9:. *2)?4"#! @2")! ;2)4>! "#2"etc. emhasis on mi%hty acts.

". 9:. *2)@a. Most translations stress God0s soerei%n control.b. Parallel +ith **2)?.

*. TheAni Huassa%es! Deut. *"2*?! 'sa. @)2@! @*2))4)*.@. ah+eh is 6in%! Psm. ?*2)! ?

*. 5o no oosition to him +ill succeed! Pro. ")2*#! );2?! )?2").@. 5o God0s leasure +ill be reali3ed! 'sa. @;2)#! Dan. @2*=! Matt.))2"=4";! 9h. )2@4=! ?.

=. The otter and the clay! 'sa. "?2);! @=2?! ;@2>! Jer. )>2)4)#! om.?2)?4"@.

;. 'rresistable %race! 93ek. ))2"#! John ;2*2"?4*#! ) Thess.=2?.

!

*"! @=2@4>! =#2"#.c. God decides +ho +ill reail! Pro. ")2*).d. God raises u ssyria! reins it in! 'sa. )#2=4)"! )@2"@4"


5/41

b. The +hole history of human rocreation! Psm. )*?2)*4);.c. 9ents of our lies! ) 5am. "2;4$! Judas

(Luke ""2""! cts "2"*4"@! *2)>! @2"

f. Peole make decisions so that 5criture may be fulfilled! Matt.)2"#4"*! "2)@4)=! ")2)4=! ";2==4=;! cts )*2"4"#! ) 5am. );2)@! )

6in%s ""2"#4"*! 'sa. ;2?4)#! ;*2)! ))4);!"=4*"! ?2""4";.

d. 5amson marryin% a Philistine! Jud%. )@2@. 1f. " 5am. "@.e. God reents eole from hearin% +ise counsel! ) 6in%s )"2)=!

" 1hron. "=2"#f. The Gosel hardens some! " 1or. "2)=4);! ) Pet. "2;4>.%. The murder of Jesus! cts "2"*! @2">! )*2"

;. Faith and 5alationa. 9h. )2@4;! "2)4)#! " Tim. )2?.b. 9lection on the basis of forekno+led%e (om. >2"?! ) Pet. )2"$E

(i$ 8hen a erson is the obKect of Bkno+!C tyically it seaksof ersonal friendshi! not factual kno+led%e.

(ii$ Psm. )2;! mos *2"! -os. )*2@! Matt. "=2)"! John )#2)@!om. ))2"! ) 1or. >2*! ) Thess. =2)"! ) Pet. )2"#.

c. Bou did not choose meHC John )=2);.d. Our resonse is God0s %ift! John ;2*! );2)@!

om. >2)=.e. 8hen God0s hand is +ith Paul! eole beliee! cts ))2")! om.

)"2*! ) 1or. "2=! )"2?! etc.f. eentance! ech. )"2)#! cts =2*)! ))2)>! " Tim. "2"=.%. 9ffectual callin%! om. )2;42*#! ))2"?.h. e%eneration! John *2=4;! >! 9h. "2)i. 5iritual understandin%! Matt. ))2"=4"

)"4);! ) Thess. )2=! " Thess. "2)@.K. Ae+ heart! etc.! Deut. *#2;! Jer. *)2*)4*@! 93ek. ))2)?! Phil.

"2)*.

=


6/41

k. 5uccess in reachin%! " 1or. *2=! @2

2">.

c. 9h. )2)).d. om. ))2**4*;.

7. The Lordshi ttributes2 uthority. The 1oncet of Diine uthority

). God has the rightto control all thin%s! the ri%ht to be obeyed.". 1ontrol is based on o+nershi of all thin%s! Deut. )#2)@! Job @)2))!

Psm. "@2)4@! 'sa. @=2?4))! Matt. "#2)4);.,. uthority is an sect of Lordshi

). 9:. *2)@2 ' +ill interret myself.". God %ies rohetic +ords! 9:. @2)"4)2@4=! ;! ")! "?! )?2*! @! )#! )"! )@!);! *#4*"! *@! *

Matt. >2)?4""! )#2*@4*>! Phil. *2

9. The Iniersality of Diine uthority2 Matt. ">2)>4"#! Phil. "2?4)#.

7'. The Lordshi ttributes2 1oenant Presence. ' M with ou! 9:. *2))4)". Gen. ")2""! ";2">! ">2)=! *?2*4@.,. 'mmanuel! 'sa.

). 9:. "2"*4"=! *2;! )=! ;2;4>! Deut. *"2! Mal. *2;.

". John >2*)4=?.9. Presence in Place

). The bush! 9:. *2"! =! )"! the mountain! 9:. )?.". The cloud and fire.

;


7/41

*. The tabernacle! the temle.@. Jesus.=. ,elieers as God0s temle.

F. Presence in ,lessin% and Jud%ment! 9:. **2)?! *@2;4


8/41

("$ (@$'mmanence

*. 'ssue is not the de%ree of emhasis on transcendence and

immanence! but +hether the conce"tsare biblical.1. 9istemolo%ical and eli%ious 'mlications). (*$ and (@$ are the +orld ie+ of unbelief.". False transcendence is irrationalist! false immanence rationalist.

Part Two: Some Problem Areas

7'''. -uman esonsibility and Freedom. esonsibility as ccountability

). 8e are accountable to God! because he has authority oer us.". 5o diine soerei%nty and human resonsibility are! at this leel!deried from the diine attributes of control and authority. Aotension.

*. 8e are resonsible for eerythin%! een our o+n nature. ) 1or.)#2*)! om. )@2"*.

@. 'n 5criture! soerei%nty and resonsibility are often found in thesame conte:t! Gen. =#2"#! 'sa. )#2=4)=! Pro. );2@4=! John )2)"4)*!;2*

a. 1ontrol and authority %o to%ether.b. God0s romises of success motiate belieers to act in accord+ith them.

c. 't is +hen +e are most a+are of God0s roidential control oerus that +e are most a+are of our resonsibility to obey. Fearand tremblin%! Phil. "2)"4)*.

d. 8ithout God0s control of the +orld! there can be no humanresosibility.

e. The meanin% and si%nificance of our lies is not based on +hat+e can do +ithout God.

,. esonsibility as Liability). 'n this sense! our resonsibility is measured by the results of our

actions.". De%ree of liability in ciil la+! assessin% blame.

1. Liability and bility). Mike makes ,illy +rite %raffiti on the school buildin% under threat.

,illy is less liable! because not Bfree.C". 5ome biblical reco%nition of this fact2 9:. ")2)"4)@! ">4*"! ""2"! 'sa.

=2)4.

>


9/41

a. esonsibility limited by inabilities! esecially i%norance.b. esonsibility increased by adanta%es! abilities.

*. ,ut some kinds of inability irreleant to resonsibility.a. Our inability to th+art God0s soerei%n decrees! 'sa. )#2=4)?!

Luke ""2""! cts "2"*! @2"


10/41

). Different kinds of abilities! absences of different reenters.". 5o different kinds2

a. Moral2 the freedom to do %ood.b. 1omatibilist2 freedom to do +hat you +ant to do.c. Libertarianism2 Bthe belief that the human +ill has an inherent

o+er to choose +ith e/ual ease bet+een alternatiesC (. 6.McGre%or 8ri%ht$.(i$ 9:cludes any causation or determination of free actions

($ -eredity! enironment.(,$ Preious eents.(1$ Our character or desire.(D$ Diine decrees.

(ii$ Libertarians think this sort of freedom is necessary formoral resonsibility.

(iii$ Libertarianism is crucial to rminian theolo%y and is theroot of Oen Theism.

F. 1riti/ue of Libertarianism). 5criture neer teaches or een mentions it. t best it is adeduction from the biblical concet of moral resonsibility. ,ut thisdeduction be%s the /uestion as to +hether libertarianism is eenreleant to moral resonsibility.

". 5criture neer %rounds moral resonsibility in libertarian freedom!or! for that matter! any other kind of freedom.

*. 5criture neer indicates that God laces any ositie alue onlibertarian freedom.

@. 5criture neer Kud%es anyone0s conduct by reference to hislibertarian freedom.

=. 'n ciil courts +e neer assume that libertarian freedom is a %roundof moral resonsibility.;. 'ndeed! ciil courts assume the oosite2 that eole are not

resonsible unless their conduct is determinedby moties.. 5criture denies that +e hae the indeendence from God re/uiredby the libertarian theory. Aor can +e choose to act indeendently ofour o+n character! Matt.


11/41

)*. 't is bad enou%h to adot a false osition (libertarianism$ it is een+orse to make it a central truth that %oerns all other theolo%icalassertions. This is +hat haens in oen theism.

)@. Do +e hae an BintuitionC of libertarian freedomE Ao. 'ntuitioncannot be the basis of a uniersal ne%atie. 8e cannot intuit that

our decisions hae no cause.)=. 5criture neer hints that God limits his soerei%nty in the +ay thistheory demands. -e is al+ays Lord.

G. 1reaturely Otherness! 'nte%rity! 5i%nificance). re +e then robotsE That mi%ht not be so bad.". ,ut 5criture says much about our maKesty and di%nity as God0s

ima%e.a. 'nte%rity2 +e function on our o+n terms! distinct from God. 8hen

' eat dinner! it is me doin% it! not God.b. 5o +e hae a kind of indeendence! thou%h not libertarian

freedom.

c. 9en God0s decree takes our inte%rity into account. 'f Godeternally decrees that ,ill +ill lie ># years! he +ill not chan%ehis mind and take ,ill0s life at ;#. 5o God resects the inte%rityof ,ill0s e:istence in the course of maintainin% the consistency ofhis o+n lan.

d. 5o for God to be consistent +ith his o+n eternal lan(soerei%nty$! he must also resect the inte%rity of his creatures(resonsibility! indeendence! freedom$.

e. s 1alinists say! redestination is not based on forekno+led%e!but forekno+led%e is not irreleant to it.

-. Models of Diine and -uman %ency

). Pilot and 1o4ilot". Teacher and 1lassroom*. Primary and 5econdary 1ausation@. 1ommander and Troos=. uthor and 1haracters in a 5tory (best model$

a. The author determines eery eent.b. ,ut there is also a comlete causal ne:us +ithin the story.c. The author is not to blame for the sins of his characters.d. There are t+o distinct leels of reality.e. The creatures are resonsible for their o+n actions.

'. The Problem of 9ilA. The Problem 5tated1 ). The Lo%ical Problem

2 a. 'f God is omniotent! he can reent eil.3 b. 'f God is %ood! he +ants to reent eil.

c. ,ut eil e:ists.d. 5o either God is not omniotent! is not %ood! or does not e:ist.

".The 9motional Problem2 heart cry in ersonal tra%edy.

))


12/41

*. Aatural and moral eil2 disaster s. sin. 'n 5criture! natural eil isthe result of moral eil.

$. The Aature of 9il). 'llusionE ,ut the illusion itself is a roblem.". Priation Theory

a. 9il is not somethin% ositie! but a lack! a defect in a %oodunierse.b. 't is absence of %ood +here %ood should be.c. Thin%s tend to sli into non4e:istence unless God reents

them.d. God %ies us free +ill (in libertarian sense$ to maintain

ourseles in bein%! but +e misuse it.e. 5o God is not resonsible.f. ely

(i$ form of the free4+ill defense! resuosin% libertarianfreedom.

(ii$ -uman sin cannot be ascribed! een in art! tometahysical entroy.(iii$ 'f God cannot reent the corrution of rational bein%s!

ho+ can he make some creatures incorrutible (thean%els! the %lorified saints$E

(i$ Ao %ood reason to say that eil is non4bein%.($ Ao biblical reason for sayin% that created thin%s tend to

sli into non4bein%.(i$ 'sn0t God resonsible for the riations of his creation! as

+ell as its bein%E 1f. a donut maker disclaimin%resonsibility for the holes.

(ii$ Dan%ers in reducin% ethics (sin$ to metahysics (bein%and non4bein%$.C. 5ome Good Thin%s bout 9il2 the BGreater Good DefenseC

). 9il necessary for an orderly unierseE ('s heaen orderlyE$". 9il necessary for moral maturityE (5criture contradicts this.$*. The ossibility of eil necessary if +e are to be free in the

libertarian senseE (BFree +ill defense.C$ (Ao$@. 5ome irtues resuose e:istin% eils2 comassion! atience!

coura%e! redemtie loe. God0s uses of eil to test! disciline us.=. 1ertainly God al+ays brin%s %ood out of eil! Gen. =#2"#! om.

>2">.;. 1autions2

a. 'mortant to define B%reater %oodC theistically.b. art from God0s standards! there can be no talk of %ood or eil

at all.c. To ri%htly ealuate God0s actions! +e must ealuate them oer

the full course of history.d. God often surrises us at the +ays he brin%s %ood out of eil.

Joseh the cross of 1hrist.

)"


13/41

e. The final solution is future. Intil then! +e +alk by faith.f. Does the end Kustify the meansE Iltimately! God is %ood and

ri%ht! not only in his ends! but also his means. ,ut don0t for%ethis uni/ue rero%aties.

%. The burden of roof is on the obKector! so +e do not need to

come u +ith a full theodicy! a full Kustification of God0s +ays.D. 9il and God0s %ency2 authors% #rings a#out% causes% controls%creates% decrees% foreordains% incites% includes within his "lan% ma&esha""en% ordains% "ermits% "lans% "redestines% "redetermines%

"roduces% stands #ehind% wills'). Authorsuniersally condemned in theolo%ical literature! but rarely

defined. Means both causin% and aroin%. rminians and otherlibertarians say that the eformed accet this! but they reKect it.

2. Causesa. 5ometimes reKected in eformed literature! erhas by

identification +ith author.

b. ,ut 1alin admits that God is the Bremote causeC of eil!accets God0s BordinationC of sin! +hich to modern readers isnot much different from Bcause.C

3. (ermitsa. rminians refer this term. eformed use it too! but insist that

God0s ermission is Befficacious.Cb. ,ut +hat0s the difference bet+een Befficacious ermissionC and

causationE Perhas the former term emhasi3es disaroal.@. Aone of these terminolo%ical otions soles the Problem of 9il.=. The authorcharacter model is of some hel2 5hakeseare is not

resonsible for killin% Duncan.

Part Three: A Philosophy of Lordship

. 9thics. 9:istential 9thics2 Morality is in+ard character.

). Greek 5ohists". 5artre

,. Teleolo%ical 9thics2 Morality is chan%in% a situation so as to achieethe %reatest %ood for the %reatest number.). 1yrenaics and 9icureans". Itilitarians2 ,entham! Mill

1. Deontolo%ical 9thics2 Morality is doin% one0s duty for its o+n sake.). Plato". 6ant*. G. 9. Moore

D. Mi:ed roaches9. 1hristian 9thics

)*


14/41

). The e:istential ersectie2 focused on the moral a%ent.". The situational ersectie2 focused on the +orld as our

enironment.*. The normatie ersectie2 focused on God0s reelation.

'. 9istemolo%y. 'ncomrehensibility and 6no+ability of God). om. )2)?4"#! Psm. @#2=! )*?2;! )@=2*! 'sa. ==2>4?! om. ))2**4*@

('sa. @#2)*4)@$.". Mystery in +hat is not reealed! Deut. "?2"?! ) 1or. "2?! ) Tim.

*2);.*. Mystery in +hat isreealed! om. ))2**4*;! 9h. *2)>4)?! ) Tim.

;2);. 5heherd0s circle2 the more kno+led%e +e hae! the more oursense of mystery.

@. God as incomarable! 9:. )=2))! ) 6in%s >2"*! 'sa. @#2)>! "=! @;2=!?. 5criture does comare God to thin%s in creation! but neer

+ithout a+e at the discreancy.=. 1an +e kno+ God by his essenceEa. oid the unscritural model of the Bunkno+able essence!C a

darkness in the core of God0s reelation to us.b. oid %lobal a%nosticism! talk about God as B+holly otherC or

B+holly hidden.Cc. Many of God0s attributes desi%nate his essence.

(i$ They describe +hat he really is.(ii$ They distin%uish him from creatures.(iii$ They describe eerythin% that God is (see later

discussion of simlicity$.

,. nalo%y). /uinasa. 8ords like goodconnote to us in the first instance somethin%

finite.b. 'n alyin% the +ord to God! +e can modify the term +ith other

terms like eternalor infinite! but in themseles they refer literally(Buni)ocallC$ to the finite.

c. Aor are these terms alied to God in an e*ui)ocal+ay! as racealied both to a contest and to an ethnic %rou.

d. Analog! for /uinas! is somethin% bet+een uniocal ande/uiocal.

e. 1omments2(i$ There needs to be some uniocal meanin% to terms like

Beternal %oodnessC or Bhi%hest %oodC if they are to dotheir Kob in /uinas0 system. That is esecially true ofcause.

(ii$ The roblem is /uinas0 claim that +e can kno+ Godonly from creatures. Aot only the creaturely +orld! but

)@


15/41

God0s self4reelation! is a rimary datum of oure:erience.

(iii$ nd lan%ua%e is %ien to us! not only to reresent finitethin%s! but more imortantly as a means of talkin% to Godand about him.

(i$ 5o ' don0t deny that some lan%ua%e about God is literal.". ,arth2 God uses inaroriate +ords and transforms them into afittin% +itness.a. ely2 5criture neer su%%ests its +ords are inaroriate.b. 'f so! +e hae no erbal reelation of God at all! but only +ords

as a medium of God0s non4erbal reelation.1. Lordshi and 6no+led%e (cf. D6G$ (1omare discussion of ethics.$

). 5ecular eistemolo%iesa. subKectiismb. emiricismc. rationalism

". ,iblical eistemolo%ya. The illumination of the 5iritb. God0s reelation in nature and historyc. God0s reelation by +ord.

''. Metahysics. The Place of Metahysics2 God cannot be God +ithout a uni/ue

nature.,. The Great 1hain of ,ein%

). Gnosticism! Plotinus! neo4Platonism! many other non41hristians.". The +orld BemanatesC from the sureme bein%! rather than bein%

created.*. Monism! antheism2 eerythin% essentially diine.@. God +holly other! as +ell as +holly identical +ith the +orld.=. The biblical metahysic! on the contrary2

a. 1lear creator4creature distinction.(i$ no min%lin%(ii$ nothin% in bet+een

b. similar distinctions bet+een God0s %oodness and man0s! etc.c. creation! not emanationd. distinction! not continuume. creation %ood! not defectie

1. The 5cholastic Philosohy of ,ein%). +ssence2 +hat necessarily belon%s to a thin% and constitutes it!

+hat makes it +hat it is. More or less nature.". Su#stance2 the bein% that hasthe essence.

a. 8hat e:ists Bin itselfC rather than in somethin% else.b. emain constant throu%h chan%e.c. The subKects to +hich thin%s haen.

*. Attri#utes2 the roerties! redicates! /ualities of a substance.

)=


16/41

a. Deninin% attributes constitute essence.b. Others are accidents.

4. $einga. the one abstract roerty that alies to absolutely eerythin%.b. +,istence! esse2 thatas distin%uished from what. 1onceied as

an Bact.C=. -ormthat element of a subsrtance that determines +hat /ualities it+ill hae.

;. /atter2 the element of a substance that recei)esform! and so is initself formless! non4bein%.

0. (otentialit% "otenca. actie2 o+er to brin% about effects.b. Passie2 the caacity to receie forms! to be chan%ed.

Brelatie nothin%ness.C>. Actualit2 the oosite of otentiality. 8hat has achieed its form.?. ecessit2 +hat must be the case. God is a Bnecessary bein%!C

because he cannot fail to e:ist. Oosite2 contingenc.)#.JF esonse2 t best! these are oer4comlications! at +orstaccommodations to errors of Greek hilosohy.

D. 5imlicity). To say God is simle is to deny comosition of arious kinds in him.

a. 1learly he is not made u of hysical arts.b. 5cholastics add2 nor of distinctions bet+een form and matter!

actuality and otentiality! %enus and differentia! substance andaccident.

c. 5o all God0s attributes are identical +ith his bein%! and all theTrinitarian ersons e:haust his bein%.

". /uinas0s ar%umentsa. There can be nothin% in God that is less noble than himself.b. Aothin% in God can be remoed from him! for nothin% in him can

not4be.c. The fact that he has many attributes is not caused! for he is first

cause.d. 'n God there can be no rocess of otentiality becomin%

actuality.*. These ar%uments don0t rule out all comle:ity in God! but only

contin%ency.@. ,ut sometimes /uinas seems to +ant to rule out all diine

comle:ity.a. -e says that since unity is al+ays rior to multilicity! God must

hae no multilicity.b. The use of many names for God is not because they refer to

%enuine comle:ities in his nature! but because of thelimitations of our minds.

c. ,ut this su%%ests the Plotinian or Gnostic ie+! in +hich God isan unnamable Oneness.

);


17/41

=. biblical ar%ument for diine simlicitya. God0s definin% attributes are essential to his bein% they are

+hat he is! John @2"@! ) John )2=! @2>! );! Psm. >?2*=! mos@2"! -eb. ;2)*! Jer. )#2)#.

b. 'f all of these characteri3e God0s essence! they are not searate

from one another. 'ndeed! God0s attributes hae diineattributes. -is mercy is eternal! his creatie o+er +ise.c. 5o the standard of loe! Kustice! etc.! is not an abstract concet!

but God himself. 5imlicity reinforces the "ersonalism of5criture.

d. The attributes are not synonymous! ho+eer! but differentersecties on the diine essence.

e. 5uch simlicity does not e:clude comle:ity. ather! eachattribute e:hausts the +hole diine comle:ity.

9. Aecessity and Freedom). God must e:ist he does not merely haen to e:ist.

". nd unless he e:ists! nothin% else can e:ist either.*. ,ut some of God0s acts are not necessary to his bein%. -e +ouldstill be God if he had not decided to create the +orld.

@. 5o +e describe some diine acts as free2 God0s decrees! creation!roidence! redemtion! reelation.

=. -o+ is God freeEa. Aot in a libertarian sense.b. 'n the comatibilist sense2 he al+ays does +hat he +ants to do.c. -e is not constrained by anythin% outside himself.d. -e is not al+ays comelled by his nature. There are no

reenters in God0s nature that reented him from makin%

other choices in the realms of decree! creation! roidence!redemtion! reelation.F. Metahysical Persecties

). God0s attributes e:ress his control2 each illustrates his control oera certain area of creation.

". They e:ress his authorit! for God0s attributes sere as standardsand criteria for creatures.

*. They e:ress the +ays in +hich he is resent to us.

Part Four: The Acts of the Lord

'''. Miracle. 5tructural Oerie+ of Parts Four Throu%h 5i:

). Aarratie of God0s actions (situational control$a. Miracleb. Proidencec. 1reation

)


18/41

d. Decrees". uthoritatie descritions of God (normatie authority$

a. Aamesb. 'ma%esc. ttributes

*. Trinitarian self4disclosure (resence e:istential$@. These are ersectial.,. Definin% Miracle

1. Ao -ebre+ or Greek term corresonds recisely to our 9n%lish+ord miracle.a. Semeion! si%n! refers to miracles! but also to circumcision in

om. @2)).b. Miracle narraties +ithout miracle terminolo%y! ) 6in%s )


19/41

(ii$ kind of mechanism +ithin the unierse that normallyaccounts for the +orkin%s of nature.

(iii$ ' reKect the attemt to define miracle as an e:cetion tola+ in this sense! for these reasons2

($ 5criture neer defines miracle this +ay! nor does it eer

identify a miracle by sayin% that it susends natural la+in this sense.(,$ '0m not coninced that there are any natural la+s in this

sense. 5criture ascribes the eents of nature directly toGod.

(1$ 9en if there are natural la+s in this sense! nobodykno+s for sure +hat they are. 5o neither the biblical+riters nor +e are fully caable of identifyin% miracles onthis definition.

(D$ 9:. )@2") sho+s that sometimes a miracle can bee:lained by an eent fully in keein% +ith natural la+ in

this sense.D. 'mmediacy). 5ome! esecially in the Old Princeton school! insisted that miracles

+ere e:ertions of God0s immediateo+er! o+er e:ercised +ithoutcreated means.

". There are some eents in +hich God acts immediately2 hisdecrees! creation e, nihilo! re%eneration.

*. ,ut 5criture neer says or imlies that miracles are immediate inthis sense.

@. nd some miracles clearly make use of means2 9:. )@2")! John ?.a. Of course the means in these cases are not used in their

ordinary +ay.b. ,ut that is merely to say that miracles are e:traordinary! as inour reliminary definition.

=. One may ersist that at least a miracle cannot be entirelaccounted for by created means. ,ut then the /uestion arises+hether aneent can be so accounted for.

;. nd if miracles are immediate acts of God! ho+ could eole eeridentify them as suchE

9. ttestin% God0s Messen%ers). 1ertainly this is an imortant function of miracles in 5criture! 9:.

@2)4=!


20/41

c. The healin%s of Jesus +ere not merelfor accreditation. Theyare e:ressions of comassion! Matt. )@2)@! )=2*"4"?! "#2*@!Mark )2@).

d. Miracles %ie suernatural stren%th to God0s eole to adancehis cause in +arfare and ean%elism.

*. 'f +e define miracle as Battestin% ne+ secial reelation!C therefore!it may aear that miracles must cease after secial reelation iscomleted. ,ut actually that doesn0t resole the issue! e:ceterbally. 8e must then leae oen the /uestion of +hether Godmay choose to do thin%s otherthan miracles for the uroses notedin " a4d.

@. ' think it better not to include that refinement in our definition.a. One could as easily ar%ue that in 5criture martyrdom attests to

ne+ secial reelation. ,ut +e +ould not +ant to say that that isits only function and that therefore martyrdom ceases at the endof the AT canon.

b. 5ame for the moral heroism of " 5am. "*2)*4)

b. uthority (ot% semeion2 si%n$! Deut. *2"@! >2*! Mark "2)4))! John"2))! "#2*#4*).(i$ 5imilarities to ah+eh0s acts in the OT2 9:. );! John ;2)4

)@! Psm. )#


21/41

). Theolo%ians often +ant to assert a shar distinction bet+een these!as on the natural la+ and immediacy definitions.a. For aolo%etic reasons2 they think they need uni/ue eents to

roe the truth of the %osel.b. ,ecause they +ant to ar%ue that miracles hae ceased! thou%h

roidence has not.". ,ut 5criture does not +arrant a shar distinction. Proidence alsotestifies to God0s Lordshi! in erhas! a less e:traordinary +ay.a. Psm. )#


22/41


23/41

". 'mortance of the consummation for the 1hristian life.D. Preseration

). Metahysical! 1ol. )2))?! @2)=! ;2*.b. The flood an ima%e of de4creation! Gen.

Pet. *2=4

). Proidence! like creation! is by God0s 8ord! Psm. )@2""4*;! Job *>4@".*. 5o it reeals God! om. )2)>4*"! cts )@2)@4)

). 'n 1hater @! +e sa+ that God %oerned all thin%s.". 1oncurrence emhasi3es that e)ereent inoles God! een

do+n to the most microscoic leel.*. 5o God +orks +ith all natural causes.

7. 1reation. Definin% 1reation

). /uinas2 the +orld0s continuin% deendence on God (some+hatdeendent on ristotle$.

". ' beliee it is more biblical to ut Bcontinuin% deendenceC underroidence! and use BcreationC to refer to God0s +ork in Gen. ).a. The ori%inal creation of the heaens and earth in )2).b. The Bsubse/uentC creation of the contents of the +orld in the

rest of the chater.,. 1reation and 1oenant Lordshi

). 1reation is God0s enthronement (6line! Images$.

"*


24/41

". 5criture uses creation as a motiation for +orshi! Aeh. ?2;! Psm.>2*4?! etc.

*. 1reation dislays God0s ownershi"of all thin%s! Psm. "@2)4".@. The Lordshi attributes

a. 1ontrol2 God rules the +orld! not only throu%h history! but at the

be%innin% of history as +ell.b. uthority2(i$ God creates by his ord! Gen. )2*! Psm. **2;! ?! John

)2).(ii$ -e interrets the creation ()2=! >! )#$2 names it and

declares it %ood.(iii$ God creates by his +isdom! Psm. )#@2"@! Pro. *2)?! >2)!

""4*;! etc.c. 1oenant Presence2 a direct relationshi bet+een God and

creation! not a continuum of mediators.1. 1reation and edemtion

). 'n the narratie of Gen. )! Moses anticiates the 9:odus. Gen. )2*4=! ;4)#! "#4"=! "2*.". 5alation is a ne+ creation! Psm. ! ;;2""! " Pet. *2)#4)*!

e. ")2)4@! 1ol. )2)=4"#! om. >2)?4").@. Faith in 1hrist is like faith in creation! -eb. ))2*! om. @2)


25/41

(iii$ -o+eer! it is the most aroriate -ebre+ term for thisconcet.

($ God is al+ays the subKect.(,$ Ised in 'sa. For redemtie re4creation.(1$ Aeer takes accusatie of material! as in BMake the

dou%h into cookies.Cd. 5ome considerations affirmin% creation e, nihilo(i$ The +orld had a be%innin% before that! only God e:isted.

There +as no material out of +hich the +orld could bemade.

(ii$ 1reation is uniersal2 heaens! earth! and sea. 5o thereis no uncreated material out of +hich the +orld could bemade.

(iii$ God creates as the Lord. The +orld is not diine. 5o Goddidn0t make the +orld from his diine substance.

(i$ 5ince there is the re4e:istin% substance and the

emanationist models are ruled out! +e can characteri3ecreation no better than to say it is out of nothin%.9. The 5i: Days

). 7ie+sa. Literal day ie+2 si: "@4hour days! more or less.b. Day4a%e ie+2 fi%uratie on the len%th of the days! literal as to

the chronolo%y.c. Frame+ork ie+2 non4literal as to chronolo%y.

". 1onsiderationsa. This is an e:e%etical issue.b. 5cience has influenced the debate. 't is ri%ht that +e re4think

theolo%y in resonse to deeloments in science! but noscientific deeloment is sufficientreason to chan%e ourunderstandin% of 5criture.

c. 8e should not assume rinciles (e.%. absoluteuniformitarianism$ inconsistent +ith 5criture.

d. There are eidences of literary structures in Gen. )! but thatdoes not in itself re/uire a non4literal understandin%.

e. The literary frame+orks asserted in Gen. ) (realmsinhabitants$are not inconsistent +ith chronolo%ical se/uence.

f. ' am not ersuaded that "2@4< re/uires a +holly natural cycle of%ro+th on the third day. God makes rain so that the seciallycreated lants +ill continue to %ro+.

%. 5o ' am not ersuaded that the days mustbe non4chronolo%icalor a%es lon%.

h. There are %ood reasons for takin% these as normal days2(i$ Dausually refers to a t+enty4four hour eriod! esecially

+hen accomanied by numerals.(ii$ The hrase Beenin% and mornin%C su%%ests a "@4hour

eriod.

"=


26/41

(iii$ 'n the 5abbath commandment! the arallel bet+eenGod0s +ork +eek and man0s su%%ests normal days.

(i$ Dasin 9:. "#2))! is neer used fi%uratiely else+here.i. ,ut ' am not ersuaded that fi%uratie ie+s should be

considered heresy.

(i$ The ar%uments are not stron% enou%h to absolutelye:clude a fi%uratie ie+.(ii$ Only recently has there been a moement in eformed

circles to make the literal ie+ a test of orthodo:y.(iii$ 't is not clear to me that any other doctrines rest on

+hether or not +e hold a literal ie+ of the days.K. God0s urose in Gen. ) is not to tell us recisely ho+ God

made the +orld! +hen ! ho+ lon% it took! etc.F. The %e of the 9arth

). 9:e%etically ' faor a youn% earth! but ' don0t think the ar%ument isstron%.

". youn% earth ie+ imlies aarent a%e! but that is the case +ithany ie+ of creation. Problems2a. stronomical eents like suernoas.b. Fossils.

G. 9olution). 'n Gen. "2

does not inbreath an already4e:istin% liin% creature to make himhuman.

". Bccordin% to their kindC (Gen. )2))4)"! ")! "@4"=$ su%%ests diinelyimosed limits on +hat can result from reroduction.

*. ' am not imressed +ith scientific eidence for Dar+inism.

@. The real ersuasie o+er of Dar+inism is that it is the only iablealternatie to diine creation.

7'. God0s Decrees. 1omare '7! 7'''! '! '7.,. God0s Plan

). BThe decrees of God are his eternal urose! accordin% to thecounsel of his +ill! +hereby! for his o+n %lory! he hath foreordained+hatsoeer comes to ass!C 851! ! etc.

*. -is lan is eternal! 'sa. *

@. -is lan is immutable! Psm. **2))! 'sa. )@2"@! @;2)#! James )2)4)#.

1. The Decrees and God0s Lordshi

";


27/41

). 1ontrol2 efficacious and uniersal. 'f God is in control of miracle!roidence! redemtion and creation! ho+ can he not be in controlof the lannin% that underlies these eentsE

". uthority2 the decrees are +ise lans and counsels! the ultimateinterretation of +orld history.

*. 1oenant resence2 -is relationshi to the +orld %oes back intoeternity. -e loes us in 1hrist before the foundation of the +orld.D. -istorical 9lection

). God often chooses ersons and %rous of eole to lay imortantroles in the history of salation! een thou%h those ersons and%rous may not be ultimately saed. 9lection in this sense may belost.a. 5aul! ) 5am. ?2)

c. ,y +orks or %raceE(i$ Grace! Deut.


28/41

Thess. "2)*! " Tim. )2?! "2)#! Tit. )2)! James "2=. 9lection ofindiiduals to salation.

@. Inconditional! eternal! 9h. )2@! " Thess. "2)*! " Tim. )2?.=. B,ook of LifeC can be an ima%e of either historical election (9:.

*"2**! Psm. ;?2"

(i$ Peole cannot beliee unless God %ies them faith.Those to +hom God does not %ie faith are rerobate!Matt. ))2"=4"

(ii$ om. ? e:licit. eaders are some+hat confused!ho+eer! because Paul uses illustrations from historicalelection (2"?4*#$. is the means! , the end.*. 5uralasarianism

a. elect some creatable eole for diine blessin%b. createc. ermit the Fall

@. 'nfralasarianisma. createb. ermit the Fallc. elect

=. 'nterretation

">


29/41

a. For sura! God0s oerarchin% urose is to bless his eole.'nfra is a%nostic about any oerarchin% urose! e:cet ofcourse for God to %lorify himself.

b. For sura! decrees "4* roide conditions for reali3in% ). ,utthere is no consistent kind of BorderC that runs throu%h the +hole

list.c. For infra! the imortant thin% is that God elects eole out of thefallenhuman race.

;. 9aluationa. The t+o ositions e/uiocate on the meanin% of orderand

therefore cannot be recisely comared.#. 5criture neer resents a definitie order of thou%hts in God0s

mind! in any releant sense of order.c. 'sa. ==2> and other such assa%es +arn us a%ainst tryin% to

read God0s mind.d. BLast in e:ecution is first in intent!C not necessarily. re the last

chords of a symhony necessarily the most imortant onesEe. 5urely in one sense! all God0s decrees resuose one another.God formulates each! +ith all the others in ie+.

f. 9ach decree takes the others into account! so all may beconsidered ends! and all means.

g. 5o there are reci"rocalrelations bet+een decrees! +hich thetheolo%ical literature i%nores.

h. Aothin% in 5criture settles the /uestion of +hether God ie+sthe elect as BcreatableC or Bcreated.C Likely both.

i. The sura concern (that God has a urose for the electtranscendin% the articular historical situation$ and that of infra

(that God doesn0t ut the Fall out of his mind in electin% eole$are both 5critural and not incomatible.. ' don0t deny that God has riorities! +hich certainly include the

fulfillment of his kin%dom uroses.

Part Five: Biblical escriptions of !od

7''. Aames of God. Aamin% and Describin%

). Aames are BroerC nouns! but they also connote meanin%.". 5o God0s names are correlatie to ima%es and attributes

,. God0s Aame and God -imself). God0s ameincludes secific names like 6ahweh! +lohim.". ,ut ame is also used in a broader sense! as in Psm. >2)! ));2


30/41

c. Thus a +ay of desi%natin% God himself. To raise his BnameC isto raise him.(i$ God0s name defends us (Psm. "#2)! saes us (=@2)$! etc.(ii$ 8hen God0s name d+ells in the temle! he is there! Deut.

)"2=! ))! ")! )@2"*4"@.

(iii$ emarkably! the name of Jesus is the same! cts @22)?.

(i$ God0s name is eery+here! Matt. =2**4*

D. 5ome Aames of God). ah+eh". don! substitutes for ah+eh.*. 9lohim

a. General term for all %ods! false and true.b. Tends to be found in conte:ts +here God is dealin% +ith the

creation in %eneral aart from his coenant +ith 'srael.c. ,ut 9lohim not simly an Be:tra4coenantalC term.

(i$ 1reation itself is coenantal.(ii$ 9lohim is rominent in the flood narratie and the

Aoachic 1oenant.

(iii$ 9:ressions Byour God!C Bour God!C BGod of 'sraelC (all+ith 9lohim$ hae rich coenantal associations.d. Plural

(i$ 'nitially Blural of abstraction! B focusin% oncharacteristics.

(ii$ Maybe also Blural of amlification.C@. 9l

a. elation to 9lohim unclear.b. Mi%ht and o+erRbut +hat name of God does not connote

these attributesE=. 9l 5haddai

a. 9secially imortant in the coenant +ith braham.b. Gen. ;2*2 not that ah+eh unkno+n in the atriarchal eriod! but

9l 5haddai more characteristic of the earlier coenant.;. Other comound names2 ah+eh '3ea0oth! 9l 9lyon! ah+eh

ir0eh! etc.

7'''. 'ma%es of God. Function2 %ie us ictures in +ords.

*#


31/41

). Psm. "*2)! )#"2"=4">.". Aeed other biblical teachin% for e:lanation. ,ut remarkably ima%es

are less controersial than attributes! etc.,. The Theolo%ical Possibility of 'ma%es

). God is transcendent and incomrehensible but there are le%itimate

ima%es of God2 man himself! and ultimately 1hrist.". Deut. @2)=4"# doesn0t say there is no ima%e or BformC of God! butthat 'srael sa+ no such form on the Day of the ssembly. 1f. Aum.)"2>.

1. nthroomorhisms). ll 5criture is anthroomorhic in the sense that it is +ritten in

human lan%ua%e! from human ie+oints.". This does not reent literal lan%ua%e about God.

D. 5ome ,iblical 'ma%es of God2 Lord! 6in%! Jud%e! La+yer! Le%islator!Father! -usband! edeemer! 5heherd! Lion! Lamb! Li%ht! ock.

9. God and Gender

). 8hat 8ould a Female God be LikeEa. The issue! of course! is ima%ery. 5ince God is incororeal! hecannot be literally male or female.

b. 5o +e focus on traits of ersonality. ,ut are there traitsdistinctie to +omenE Feminists don0t a%ree.

". Feminine 'ma%es of God in 5criture2a. Deut. *"2)>! Aum. ))2)". ,ut Gal. @2)? and ) Thess. "2< are

e/ually strikin%! thou%h they are alied to male aostles.b. 'sa. @"2)@4)= also similar to other statements made of men!

Psm. @>2@4;! 'sa. )*2>! ")2*! etc.c. Luke )=2>4)# and Matt. "*2"< don0t call in /uestion the %ender

of Jesus.d. 7achamand S"lanchni8omai.e. 5irit in Gen. )2"! John *2=.f. 8isdom in Pro. 2)4?2)>.

(i$ diine fi%ure! identified +ith 1hrist in ) 1or. )2"@! *#!1ol. "2*.

(ii$ 5imilar to ord.(iii$ ,ut Jesus certainly male.(i$ nd the female fi%ure in Proerbs is the counterart to

the rostitute! BLady Folly.C The femininity of +isdom isnot intended to sho+ a feminine element in God.

*. Theolo%ical 'mortance of Masculine 'ma%erya. The redominance of masculine ima%ery in 5criture is art of

the reelation of his nature.b. 'n 5criture! God names himself. 8e should not resume to re4

name him.c. Female deities and coules +ere +ell4kno+n in the ancient near

east. The biblical +riters distinctly reKected them.

*)


32/41

d. 'n creation! God makes somethin% outside itself! more closelyanalo%ous to the male role in reroduction than the female.

e. 9ordconnotes authority! as +ith rohets! riests! and kin%s. sthese are redominantly male! it +ould confuse matters to thinkof God as female.

f. God relates to his eole as husband to +ife. That relation+ould be obscure if +e +ere to conceie of God as female.%. To eliminate all se:ually distinctie lan%ua%e +ould su%%est that

God is imersonal.h. -as the use of male lan%ua%e for God oressed +omenE '

don0t think so.

'. God0s ttributes. eie+ From 1hater )",. God0s ttributes and -is Lordshi

). God0s Lordshi is %rounded in his eternal nature! and therefore in

his attributes. 5o Lordshi is a +ay of describin% God in himself!not only his relationshi to us.". Our thinkin% about God0s attributes should be as serants.*. The attributes describe God0s Lordshi from arious ersecties.

a. God0s control oer arious asects of creation.b. God0s standards for ealuatin% different arts of creation.c. God0s o+n character as dislayed in his reelation on earth.

@. God0s loe! for e:amle! isa. a soerei%n loe! by +hich he controls the drama of salation ()

John @2)#! )?$.b. loe that sets the standard for our loe (John )*2*@4*=! ) John

*2);! @2)?$.c. loe that characteri3es his essence () John @2>! );$ andtherefore all his dealin%s +ith creation.

1. Does God -ae a Fundamental ttributeE). 5ome hae su%%ested ,ein% (/uinas$! eracity (Jansen$! loe

(itschl$.". ,ut 5criture says! not only BGod is loe!C but also BGod is li%htC ()

John )2=$. nd +hat of 5irit (John @2"@$! Kealousy (9:. *@2)@$!holiness ('sa. ;2*$! almi%htiness (9:. ;2)ff$! LordshiE

*. ,etter2 all definin% attributes are ersectial. 9ach includes all theothers.

@. Aot all e/ually imortant.D. 1lassifications

). -ard to Kud%e! for 5criture utili3es no scheme of classification.". Transcendence'mmanence2 hard to searate.*. 'ncommunicable1ommunicable2 'n one sense! all attributes are

both.@. My threefold scheme

a. loe

*"


33/41

b. kno+led%ec. o+er

(i$ includes BtranscendenceC attributes like eternity.(ii$ For transcendence is not another lace! but God0s

e:altation on his throne of o+er. 1hart2

Goodness 6no+led%e Po+er

1ontrolDynamic1ontent

GoodnessLoeGraceMercyPatience1omassionJealousy

8rath

5eech 9ternity'mmensity'ncororeality8illPo+er9:istence(+sse$

uthority 5tatic Form! 5tructure

Justicei%hteousness

Truth seity5imlicity9ssence

Presence 'nte%rity 'nolement

Joy,lessedness,eautyPerfection-oliness

6no+led%e8isdomMind

Glory5iritualityOmniresence

9. 5tartin% 8ith Goodness). ,est for non4hilosohical! ractical students.". 7s. notion that the o+er4attributes (sometimes called

BmetahysicalC attributes$ are more fundamental.*. Passa%es in 5criture that sound most like definitions of God

usually focus on ethical attributes! 9:. **2)?! *@2;4! );! )2=! 'sa. ;2*.

. God0s GoodnessA. Goodness as Perfection

). Goodis a %eneral term of commendation.". 'n theolo%y! goodoften Berfection!C all of God0s e:cellencies.*. ny attribute ascribed to God is suremely e:cellent.

$. The 9uthyhro Problem

**


34/41

). 's God %ood because he fulfills a standard of %oodness! or does hedefine the standardEa. 'f the former! he seems to be subKect to a standard hi%her than

himself.b. 'f the latter! it seems that he could arbitrarily define +hat

%oodness is.". 'n biblical theism! %ood is God0s ery nature. 5o it is neither aboehim! nor arbitrarily defined by him.

*. There is a kind of circularity here2 +e raise God for his %oodnessbut %oodness is by definition anythin% that he is.a. 1omare2 if ' define B%reatest basketball layin%C +ith +hat ' do

on the court.b. The difference is that my layin% is not a lausible definition of

%reat basketball. God0s nature is the only lausible definition of%oodness.

@. 5o %oodness is fundamentally a ersonal /uality! not an abstract

concet.C. Goodness as ,eneolence). The most common biblical meanin% on %oodness as a diine

attribute.". !o)% agathos% &alos! Gen. =#2"#! Aum. )#2"?! Deut. *#2=.

D. ObKects of God0s Goodness). -is eole! Psm. .*. Many of God0s enemies (Matt. =2@=! cts )@2)

*2?$.@. 9eryone! Psm. )@=2?! )*4);.

=. Aot eeryone receies thesame

blessin%! but een the lost haee:erienced somethin% of God0s %oodness.+. God0s Goodness and -is Lordshi

). 1ontrol2 't0s God0s decision to besto+ blessin%s on his creation.". uthority2 -e defines +hat %oodness is for himself and his

creatures.*. Presence2 Goodness is the character he dislays in all his

inolements +ith us.-. God0s Loe

). Definition2 BHhis self4%iin% affection for his ima%e4bearin%creatures and his unselfish concern for their +ell4bein%! that leadshim to act on their behalf and for their hainess and +elfare!C1ottrell.a. Like %oodness! but distinctly a relationshi bet+een ersons.b. ,oth affection and action! feelin%s and deeds.c. Aga"e2 not! as a Greek +ord! an esecially noble term. ,ut it

%ains its rofound meanin% from its theolo%ical uses in5criture.

". Turretin0s distinctions

*@


35/41

a. ,eneolence2 God +illed %ood to the creature from eternity.9lection.

b. ,eneficence2 -e does %ood to the creature in time accordin% tohis %ood +ill. edemtion and sanctification.

c. 1omlacency2 deli%hts himself in the creature on account of the

rays of his ima%e seen in them. Gratuitous re+ards.d. 5o God loes us first (a! b$! then loes us a%ain because of his+ork in us (c$.

*. ObKects of God0s Loea. God0s self4loe2 necessary! as oosed to his free loe of

creatures.b. God0s uniersal loe! Matt. =2@*4@>! John *2);! @2@"! ) John

@2)@.(i$ -is intention to sae Bthe +orldC of sinful eole.(ii$ The imact of 1hrist on the +orld does benefit the

rerobate. Just as God0s +rath on the elect (9h. "2*$ is

real +rath! so his blessin%s to the rerobate are realblessin%s.(iii$ 5hould +e eer say BGod loes youC to a %rou includin%

unbelieersE Deut.

(i$ Throu%hout 5criture! redemtion comes from God0sloe! Deut. *@2;! Aum. ;2"@4";! cts ))2"*! )>2"


36/41

*. 5alation aart from +orks of the la+! om. *2")4"@! Gal. "2")!9h. "2>4?! " Tim. )2)#.

H. 1ommon Grace). God restrains sin! Gen. @2)=! ))2;! "#2;! etc.". God restrains his +rath! cts )! " Pet. *2?.

(atience.*. God %ies temoral blessin%s to all! Psm. ;=2=4)*! )#@! )*;2"=!cts )@2)

@. Inre%enerate eole do %ood! " 6in%s )"2"! Luke ;2**. 5ee 81F);.4")! Matt. "*2"4*.;. Inre%enerate eole e:erience some blessin%s of the -oly 5irit!

Aum. ""2

"2)@! Psm. ";2*.@. Aha#ahis %enerally the loe that initiates the coenant chesed

resuoses an e:istin% coenant.=. God0s chesedoer all his +orks! Psm. *;2)4=! )#! since creation

itself is coenantal.:. God0s 1omassion

). symathetic ie+ of another0s distress! motiatin% helful action.". Of God in 9:. **2)?! *@2;.

;.Other Forms of God0s Goodness2 %entleness! beauty! deli%ht! eace!blessedness.

'. God0s i%hteousness and 8rath. ,asic Distinctions

). amist 1harta. 'nternal (God0s moral e:cellence$b. 9:ternal (the rectitude of his conduct$

(i$ rectoral or le%islatie (romul%atin% Kust la+s for hiscreatures$

(ii$ distributie (administerin% re+ards and unishments$($ remuneratie (distribution of re+ard$(,$ retributie (distribution of unishment$

". Frame Triada. 9:istential (God0s moral e:cellence$! a on the amist chart.b. Aormatie (God0s o+n standards for himself and creation$! b(i$

on amist chart.c. 5ituational (God0s actions! by +hich he makes his ri%hteousness

reail$! includes b! (ii$ on amist chart.

*;


37/41

,. God0s i%hteous 5tandards). Our resonsibility is to imitate God! Le. )?2)! ) Pet. )2)=4);! Matt.

=2@>! allo+in% for the discontinuities bet+een his ri%hts and ouro+n.

". Proortionality of enalties in the la+! Obadiah )=! 9:. ")2"@.

*. kind of elemental fairness.@. God0s o+n Kud%ments Kust! Gen. )>2"=! Deut. *"2@! Psm. )@=2)

@. God0s 8ord is an obKect of +orshi! Psm. =;2@! )#! ))?2)"#! );)4;"! 'sa. ;;2=! like his Bname!C Psm. ?2"! *@2*! ;>2@! )*>2".

=. The 8ord is God (John )2)$.;. Aecessary and free +ords.

*


38/41

a. Aecessary2 intertrinitarian communication.b. Free2 decrees and other +ords concernin% the creation.

,. God0s Truth). -is 8ord is truth! John )

". Three meanin%s of truth2a. Metahysical2 the %enuine! comlete! ultimate! Jer. )#2?4)#!John )! nor can he be inerror! -eb. @2)"4)*. -e is true! thou%h eery man a liar! om.*2@. nd he is the standard of truth for us.

c. 9thical2 faithfulness! reliability in all areas of life.(i$ 'n human bein%s! " John @! ) John )2;! *2)>.(ii$ 'n God! Deut. ! Psm. @#2))! -os.

)"2). 7irtually faithfulness.

1. God0s 6no+led%e). 'mortance ofustificationin kno+led%e sho+s that all humankno+led%e is reli%ious! resuoses God (D6G$.

". 6no+led%e as a diine attribute! ) 5am. "2*! Psm. ?@2)#! 'sa.@;2)#.

D. God0s 6no+led%e and his Lordshi). 9/uation of kno+led%e +ith God0s election! choice! mos *2".". 6no+led%e and control! 'sa. @#2)"4)@. God made the +orld by his

+isdom.*. 6no+led%e and authority2 5criture correlates God0s kno+led%e

+ith his Kud%ments! Psm. ;2)

)"2)

*>


39/41

*. God0s forekno+led%e of free human decisions and actionsa. Oen theists limit redictie rohecy to four tyes2

(i$ announcements of God0s o+n intentions(ii$ seakin% in ery %eneral terms that could be fulfilled by

many states of affairs.

(iii$ nnouncin% eents that are necessary (or hi%hlyrobableE$ conse/uences of ast and resent states ofaffairs.

(i$ nnouncin% +hat +ill haen if certain conditions obtain.b. Denial of God0s forekno+led%e of human free choice is /uite a

s+eein% /ualification uon his omniscience. -uman decisionseen affect the +eather.

c. 5ome assa%es that cannot be understood in the fourcate%ories under a! aboe2 Gen. ?2"@4"2)"! Psm. )*?2@! 'sa.@@2">4@=2)*! Jer. )2=! *4)?.@. Passa%es alle%ed to teach diine i%norancea. Gen. *2?

(i$ 'f God is i%norant! then he is i%norant of the resent andast! not of the future. ,ut oen theists often claim thatGod kno+s eerythin% about the ast and resent.

(ii$ ctually! the /uestions are God0s cross4e:amination.b. Gen ))2=2 same considerations here.c. Gen. )>2"#4")

(i$ %ain! concerns God0s kno+led%e of the"resent.(ii$ This also is a Kudicial e:amination.

(iii$ 8hen God enters time! he behaes in some resects asa temoral bein%! doin% one thin% on Monday! another onTuesday! etc. 5o he obseres each thin% as it haensand in that sense his kno+led%e increases.

d. Gen. ""2)"(i$ %ain! the issue is more Kudicial than eistemolo%ical.(ii$ nthroomorhism! %rounded in God0s inolement +ith

the temoral se/uence.(iii$ 5imilarly +ith Deut. )*2*! Psm. @@2")! )*?2)! "*.

e. BPerhasC in Jer. ";2"4*! 93ek. )"2*.(i$ God0s test! +hich is not comlete until the resonse of

the eole.(ii$ Intil that resonse! there are some senses in +hich

'srael is BableC (see 1hater >$ to make either resonse.(iii$ -ence! from a human oint of ie+! the outcome of the

test is uncertain. God is here seakin% human lan%ua%e.f. God rememberin% and for%ettin%! Gen. >2)! ?2)=4);! 9:. ;2=!

Psm. ?2)>! )*2)! Jer. "*2*?.

*?


40/41

(i$ BememberC simly means to fulfill the coenantromises.

(ii$ BFor%ettin%C is the temorary delay! seen from a humanoint of ie+.

%. B't neer entered my mind!C Jer. 2)#.

G. God0s 6no+led%e of Possibilities). God0s kno+led%e of +hat is ossible2 his necessarkno+led%e!

natural kno+led%e! kno+led%e of intellect.a. God kno+s +hat is ossible by kno+in% his o+n nature.b. Isually!"ossi#lehere refers to metahysical ossibility! i.e.!

consistency +ith God0s o+n nature.". God0s kno+led%e of +hat is actual2 his freekno+led%e orkno+led%e of ision.a. God kno+s actualities in creation by kno+in% his"lan.b. This kno+led%e is BfreeC because God has freely decided to

create the +orld.-. God0s 6no+led%e of 1ontin%encies2 BMiddle 6no+led%eC

). 1rai%0s definition2 God0s kno+led%e of +hat eery ossible freecreature +ould do under any ossible set of circumstances and!hence! kno+led%e of those ossible +orlds +hich God can makeactual. The content of this kno+led%e is not essential to God.

". 'n this sense! God does hae middle kno+led%e2 ) 5am. "*2


41/41

). hei%htened kno+led%e! enetratin% to dee si%nificance andractical releance. 9:. ">2*! *)2*! ;! ) 6in%s !James *2)*4)>! Pro. >2"#4"). The skill of %odly liin%.

*. +ay of salation! cts ;2)#! om. )2);! ) 1or. )2)>4"2);.@. Iltimately! 1hrist! ) 1or. )2*#! 1ol. "2*! 'sa. ))2".=. 8isdom of the +orld antithetical! 'sa. "?2)@! om. )2""! ) 1or. )4".;. The source of all God0s +ork in creation and roidence! Psm.

)#@2"@! )*;2=! Pro. *2)?! Jer. )#2)"! =)2)=! om. ))2**4*;.J. God0s Mind

). 5criture does not enumerate and comare faculties in God! likeintellect! +ill! ima%ination! etc.

". God0s BmindC in 5criture is his thou%hts! not a faculty thatroduces them.

*. God0s thou%hts functions of his +hole bein%.

@. God thinks (imlicit in references to his counsel! decrees! etc.$=. God and lo%ica. God0s thinkin% and actin% are consistent and alid! therefore

lo%ical.b. s +ith God0s ri%hteousness! his lo%ic is his o+n character! not

somethin% aboe or belo+ him.c. -is thinkin% is not! ho+eer! necessarily in accord +ith any

articular human system of lo%ic.d. There may be some aarent contradictions in 5criture that

cannot be resoled by our current systems of lo%ic. ' cannot!ho+eer! secify any of these.

@)

ST1_TheDoctrineofGod

Documents