Sign In Sign-Up

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

Institutes of The Christian Religion

John Calvin

Lesson Four

Book I, chapters 1-5
The doctrine of the knowledge of God

Adult Education Class for RMPCA, class begins May 9, 2004
stored on the net at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/lesson4_essay.html
date shared: May 30, 2004

Outlines:

for the rest of the class.
The major idea is to follow the structure of Institutes and dedicate 3 classes to each book, therefore taking roughly 1/3 of each book per class. The next thing is to organize each lesson around 3 topics of critical importance(my choice). This will recognize Calvin's structure and yet allow the freedom to study what is important to us today topically. The big problem is that the topics cross book boundaries, so we will sometimes defer the complete discussion of topics to subsequent weeks, rather than skip ahead in the Institutes. We can live with this shortcoming rather than jump around in Institutes chasing topics and running down threads, certain to be more confusing than helpful.
{illustration: MASH episode with Klinger learning history in order}

for the next 3 weeks:
Book One-
The knowledge of God as Creator
1st class-what can we know about God from the Creation (chp 1-5)
issues are: knowledge of God, sense of divinity, natural theology.

2nd class-this knowledge is through the Scriptures(6-13)
the doctrine of the necessity of Scripture, as Creation is not sufficient to show God as Redeemer or Jesus as Mediator.
issues are: accommodation, the extended metaphor of spectacles, natural theology as incapable of presenting God as Redeemer.
reason are incapable of justifying either Scripture itself or the knowledge to be gained from it, the Spirit speaking through it is both the justification and the assurance, this follows from the character of the Author of Scripture.

3rd class-providence, the problems of sin(14-18)
issues are: the 3 levels of providence, the pervasiveness of sin in extent, the purpose of providence.

left over questions:

Calumny

(Lat. calvor, to use artifice, to deceive)

Etymologically any form of ruse or fraud employed to deceive another, particularly in judicial proceedings. In its more commonly accepted signification it means the unjust damaging of the good name of another by imputing to him a crime or fault of which he is not guilty.

for this lesson:

there is no room for excuse. We cannot plead ignorance, without being at the same time convicted by our own consciences both of sloth and ingratitude

Particulars of this 1st class on Book I:
I.the topic is Calvin's epistemology.
***new word alert: define epistemology-->

from: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/EPISTEMI.html
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: what distinguishes true (adequate) knowledge from false (inadequate) knowledge? Practically, this questions translates into issues of scientific methodology: how can one develop theories or models that are better than competing theories? It also forms one of the pillars of the new sciences of cognition, which developed from the information processing approach to psychology, and from artificial intelligence, as an attempt to develop computer programs that mimic a human's capacity to use knowledge in an intelligent way.

1.how do we know God and know ourselves? what is the relationship between the two types of knowledge?
2.how reliable is the knowledge thus gained? what is the difference between knowledge and belief?
3.how do we justify or warrant this knowledge?

***new word alert: define warrant/justification-->

from: http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Theory_of_justification

Justification is a normative activity

One way of explaining the theory of justification is to say: A justified belief is one which we are within our rights in holding. By this is meant, not political rights, or moral rights, but "intellectual" rights.

In some way each of us is responsible for what we believe. We don't just go off and believe anything. We each have an intellectual responsibility or obligation, to believe what is true and to avoid believing what is false. Being intellectually responsible involves being within one's intellectual rights in believing something; in such cases one is justified in one's belief.

Thus, justification is a normative notion. That means that it has to do with norms, rights, responsibilities, obligations, and so forth. The standard definition is that a concept is normative iff it is a concept regarding or depending on the norms, or obligations and permissions (very broadly construed), involved in human conduct. It is generally accepted that the concept of justification is normative, because it is defined as a concept regarding the norms of belief.

4.the difference between seeing and hearing.
5.the essentialness and inescapableness of the personalness of knowledge.
6.the 3 part modality of our knowledge.
II. the sense of divinity
1. immediateness, vitality, personalness, inescapable
2. it is the answer to the question of how a mercyful God can judge those who have not heard the Gospel.
III. issues of natural theology
1. Calvin is attacking RC natural theology
2.for a humanist how do you account for the genius of the Greeks:S. A. P. without making them into christians before the fact?

the structure is best seen in what does Calvin wish to prove:
1st: I believe in God....what does it mean to BELIEVE in God, is this the same as to KNOW God?
answer: To recognize Him as your Creator, to be motivated by piety and gratitude for this, and to rightful worship Him.
2nd: is God just in condemning the heathen to hell?....What does it mean to know God as CREATOR?
answer: yes, everyone who has ever lived knows enough about God as their Creator to be without excuse.
3rd: is this natural knowledge enough to save? or was Aristotle, or Plato or Cicero saved by their extraordinary grasp of reality?
answer: no, natural theology is not sufficient to save, God as Redeemer is not available to us in creation.

Essay:

Today's lesson is going to be a little bit different in structure, mostly because of the complexity of the issues and partly because of my interest in them. Catch me if i lapse into philosophic technical jargon, it is not my intention to confuse with these terms.

First we can spent a little time on the overall structure and thesis of Book One.
First the knowledge of God is inescapable, all human beings know enough about God to realize that they owe Him piety and worship.
But this information is not enough to force the emotions of the natural man to love God, nor to properly worship Him.
Second, Scripture alone shows God to be our Redeemer. But the natural man can not even read Scripture properly to understand this.
Lastly, Providence renders mankind even more guilty of ingratitude in that we are sustained by God and are not thankful to Him for this.

Thus we are discussing and studying it from the top down, remembering that Calvin is a bottom up thinker, from Scripture to the big issues. So we are not studying it in the same direction that Calvin wrote it. But we are trying to get a handle on Institutes as quickly and painlessly as possible and top down is better for these reasons. Then we are going to talk about the selections/abridgments that i made and included in the readings for lesson 4, this morning. Then I'll ask you to reread the lesson here and read at that time the selections from Calvin. I think hearing about them first in context, then thinking about the major ideas they contain before reading them will help a little bit on motivation and understanding. The big point is simply to keep people interested and awake during the reading of the selections from Calvin. I'd like a little bit of feedback on if this works as intended, please.

What I've done is to pull a few quotes from each section, put them into bold print, put the needed context around them in italics and copy the headers of each chapter as well, so you can see the topics in their order. Then ask a few questions that will hopefully get to the heart of the matter and gather a few explanatory notes from my reading, inserting them as appropriate. Then at the end of lesson 4 are the links to the sections of Book I we've been discussing so if you are inspired to do so, you can read the complete chapters. Since the length would exceed our 20 page maximum i have cut pieces out and marked them with "...", i feel bad about abridging Calvin, but i don't see an option.

Topic is Reformed Epistemology, although Calvin certainly never used these terms. It's a big topic in both modern theology and philosophy, I am just a little skeptical of my ability to see through the last 450 years of discussion on the topic and to actually capture what Calvin thought about the topic, rather than what history teaches, but i will try.

{First a little motivation with the subject: vacuum cleaners and spam sorting software, AI, natural language translation and visual face recognization.}

But before i embark on a tour of epistemology (introduce as new word), I'd like to try to summarize an extended metaphor that both Calvin uses, is embedded in Scripture and is a part of our language. draw this as motif #3, (another graphic handout), the world via eyes and ears.

Explanation of 'testimony of eyewitnesses' motif
In the world of nature, we use our eyes to navigate. Sounds are almost always warnings. A dear friend, Jerry was blind and often we discussed what was worse, being blind or not being able to hear, Jerry insisted that deafness cuts you off from the world of people, where blindness 'only' cut you off from the physical world. We use the analogy of our senses in a significant and interesting way. Terms that 'betray' this motif: The voice of God, an eyewitness account, we hear rumors, while we see the truth or the factualness of the situation.

from:http://www.redeemer.on.ca/~tplanti/k/TSZ.HTM
Visualism. The philosophical tendency, which goes back to the Greeks, to understand knowledge in terms of vision or sight. To know is to see, to have a view. John Dewey complained about the "spectator" conception of knowledge.

This is the same kind of distinction between the knowledge of how and the ability to do, praxis versus intellectualism, that we hear from engineering and other practical people.

No better place to see this then in the Gospel of John 20:20-31

And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord.

So Jesus said to them again, "Peace {be} with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you."

And when He had said this, He breathed on them and *said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

"If you forgive the sins of any, {their sins} have been forgiven them; if you retain the {sins} of any, they have been retained."

But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

So the other disciples were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."

After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus *came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace {be} with you."

Then He *said to Thomas, "Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing."

Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"

Jesus *said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed {are} they who did not see, and {yet} believed."

Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;

but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

This metaphor of sight and touch versus hearing. The world of nature and certainty versus the world of men, of words, of deceit, one via the eyes and the other via the ears. The testimony of the apostles ought to have been sufficient, for it is for the subsequent Church through the ages. But Thomas is a good illustration of what epistemology is all about.

and in Exodus 33:18-23

Then Moses said, "I pray You, show me Your glory!"

And He said, "I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion."

But He said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!"

Then the LORD said, "Behold, there is a place by Me, and you shall stand {there} on the rock;

and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by.

"Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen."

What is the point of this? Why can we hear God's voice and yet not see His face/form/glory?  Why do we consistently draw this difference between the modes of knowing the world- between seeing and hearing?

1st hearing is the world of men, and we know people lie to us. Words are used to deceive, we use words in such sinful ways ourselves and are aware of being victimized likewise. 2nd is the directionality of sight, versus the haziness, the lack of specificity of hearing. 3rd is words themselves, language must be interpreted, we are aware of foreign languages that we can not translate. The illustration that a native language is one that you can not resist hearing meaningfully. The connection of hearing words and the ideas they provoke in our minds. Where things we see seem to offer a different, much more secure route into our consciousness. Seeing is believing, eyewitnesses to the truth. Seeing is touch at a distance, reach out and touch someone with your voice, eyes are windows of the soul. The innate certainty of sight, versus the doubting quality of hearing. How close things appear in a telescope, so that we are tempted to reach out and touch them......

But what happens to these sensations once they get 'inside' our brains? The easiest metaphor is the 3 divisions of us into: reason, will, emotion and how knowledge applies to each of these 'pieces'.

2nd motif: Knowledge as possessing 3 modalities
***new word alert: define modalities--->

n. pl. mo·dal·i·ties

1. The fact, state, or quality of being modal.
2. A tendency to conform to a general pattern or belong to a particular group or category.
3. Logic. The classification of propositions on the basis of whether they assert or deny the possibility, impossibility, contingency, or necessity of their content. Also called mode.
4. modalities The ceremonial forms, protocols, or conditions that surround formal agreements or negotiations: “ [He] grew so enthusiastic about our prospects that he began to speculate on the modalities of signing” (Henry A. Kissinger).
5. Medicine. A therapeutic method or agent, such as surgery, chemotherapy, or electrotherapy, that involves the physical treatment of a disorder.
6. Physiology. Any of the various types of sensation, such as vision or hearing.

Knowledge of God for Calvin, analogous to faith is an activity of all 3 pieces/divisions within our human nature, intellect,  emotions and the will. Strictly intellectual knowledge is impossible, like:

Jam 2:19

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble

Note how the belief-that there is one God, yields an emotional matrix-fear followed by a 'physical' activity---tremble. All three pieces: reason, will emotion,  or mind, soul, body, or intellect, emotion, will, however you wish to divide us up, all the pieces are involved in knowledge, not just the intellectual. For Calvin knowledge, especially the knowledge of God is never neutral, never without stimulating the heart to react, either positively in worship and adoration or negatively in fear and trembling. The knowledge itself causes a reaction in all people. I'm going to use the terms persuasive knowledge and cordial knowledge to make this distinction.
***new word alert: define cordial--->
dealing with the heart, emotions.

{I spent a lot of time trying to find an example of this modalism of knowledge, and found it in the example of my wife hearing our baby cry and her body responding to get ready to feed the baby. Here is the issue, a babies cry is as an engineer would phrase it, just a signal, yet ask any mother-she can recognize her child's cry. How can this be in a nursery crowded with crying babies? Yet each mother-child shares this bond that just a small cry inititates a cascade of emotion and hormones that results in the mom being ready to feed the child.}

finished with the motifs, with these two illustrations, now to the text of Institutes:
The first question is why? Why did Calvin begin Institutes in this manner? The short answer is Romans 1. In particular verses 18 through 25.


Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.


The long answer is Calvin's Commentary on these verses, part of the reading for this week, it is the first commentary or sermon quotation we've seen for the class. So try to see the difference in tone between this and the Institutes.

[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/Calvin/calcom38.all.html#v.vi]
Please remember from lesson 2 of the significance of both commentaries and sermons to the Institutes. This ought to make us play close detailed attention to the following:

18. For revealed, etc. He reasons now by stating things of a contrary nature, and proves that there is no righteousness except what is conferred, or comes through the gospel; for he shows that without this all men are condemned: by it alone there is salvation to be found. And he brings, as the first proof of condemnation, the fact, — that though the structure of the world, and the most beautiful arrangement of the elements, ought to have induced man to glorify God, yet no one discharged his proper duty: it hence appears that all were guilty of sacrilege, and of wicked and abominable ingratitude.

To some it seems that this is a main subject, and that Paul forms his discourse for the purpose of enforcing repentance; but I think that the discussion of the subject begins here, and that the principal point is stated in a former proposition; for Paul’s object was to teach us where salvation is to be found. He has already declared that we cannot obtain it except through the gospel: but as the flesh will not willingly humble itself so far as to assign the praise of salvation to the grace of God alone, Paul shows that the whole world is deserving of eternal death. It hence follows, that life is to be recovered in some other way, since we are all lost in ourselves. But the words, being well considered, will help us much to understand the meaning of the passage.

Some make a difference between impiety and unrighteousness, and think, that by the former word is meant the profanation of God’s worship, and by the latter, injustice towards men; but as the Apostle immediately refers this unrighteousness to the neglect of true religion, we shall explain both as referring to the same thing.  And then, all the impiety of men is to be taken, by a figure in language, as meaning “the impiety of all men,” or, the impiety of which all men are guilty. But by these two words one thing is designated, and that is, ingratitude towards God; for we thereby offend in two ways: it is said to be ἀσέβεια, impiety, as it is a dishonoring of God; it is ἀδικία, unrighteousness, because man, by transferring to himself what belongs to God, unjustly deprives God of his glory. The word wrath, according to the usage of Scripture, speaking after the manner of men, means the vengeance of God; for God, in punishing, has, according to our notion, the appearance of one in wrath. It imports, therefore, no such emotion in God, but only has a reference to the perception and feeling of the sinner who is punished. Then he says that it is revealed from heaven; though the expression, from heaven, is taken by some in the sense of an adjective, as though he had said “the wrath of the celestial God;” yet I think it more emphatical, when taken as having this import, “Wheresoever a man may look around him, he will find no salvation; for the wrath of God is poured out on the whole world, to the full extent of heaven.”

The truth of God means, the true knowledge of God; and to hold in that, is to suppress or to obscure it: hence they are charged as guilty of robbery. — What we render unjustly, is given literally by Paul, in unrighteousness, which means the same thing in Hebrew: but we have regard to perspicuity.

19. Inasmuch as what may be known of God, etc. He thus designates what it behoves us to know of God; and he means all that appertains to the setting forth of the glory of the Lord, or, which is the same thing, whatever ought to move and excite us to glorify God. And by this expression he intimates, that God in his greatness can by no means be fully comprehended by us, and that there are certain limits within which men ought to confine themselves, inasmuch as God accommodates to our small capacities what he testifies of himself. Insane then are all they who seek to know of themselves what God is: for the Spirit, the teacher of perfect wisdom, does not in vain invite our attention to what may be known, τὸ γνωστὸν; and by what means this is known, he immediately explains. And he said, in them rather than to them, for the sake of greater emphasis: for though the Apostle adopts everywhere Hebrew phrases, and ב, beth, is often redundant in that language, yet he seems here to have intended to indicate a manifestation, by which they might be so closely pressed, that they could not evade; for every one of us undoubtedly finds it to be engraven on his own heart, By saying, that God has made it manifest, he means, that man was created to be a spectator of this formed world, and that eyes were given him, that he might, by looking on so beautiful a picture, be led up to the Author himself.

20. Since his invisible things, etc. God is in himself invisible; but as his majesty shines forth in his works and in his creatures everywhere, men ought in these to acknowledge him, for they clearly set forth their Maker: and for this reason the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews says, that this world is a mirror, or the representation of invisible things. He does not mention all the particulars which may be thought to belong to God; but he states, that we can arrive at the knowledge of his eternal power and divinity;  for he who is the framer of all things, must necessarily be without beginning and from himself. When we arrive at this point, the divinity becomes known to us, which cannot exist except accompanied with all the attributes of a God, since they are all included under that idea.

So that they are inexcusable. It hence clearly appears what the consequence is of having this evidence — that men cannot allege any thing before God’s tribunal for the purpose of showing that they are not justly condemned. Yet let this difference be remembered, that the manifestation of God, by which he makes his glory known in his creation, is, with regard to the light itself, sufficiently clear; but that on account of our blindness, it is not found to be sufficient. We are not however so blind, that we can plead our ignorance as an excuse for our perverseness. We conceive that there is a Deity; and then we conclude, that whoever he may be, he ought to be worshipped: but our reason here fails, because it cannot ascertain who or what sort of being God is. Hence the Apostle in Hebrews 11:3, ascribes to faith the light by which man can gain real knowledge from the work of creation, and not without reason; for we are prevented by our blindness, so that we reach not to the end in view; we yet see so far, that we cannot pretend any excuse. Both these things are strikingly set forth by Paul in Acts 14:16-17, when he says, that the Lord in past times left the nations in their ignorance, and yet that he left them not without witness (amarturon,) since he gave them rain and fertility from heaven. But this knowledge of God, which avails only to take away excuse, differs greatly from that which brings salvation, which Christ mentions in John 17:3, and in which we are to glory, as Jeremiah teaches us, Jeremiah 9:24

21. For when they knew God, etc. He plainly testifies here, that God has presented to the minds of all the means of knowing him, having so manifested himself by his works, that they must necessarily see what of themselves they seek not to know — that there is some God; for the world does not by chance exist, nor could it have proceeded from itself. But we must ever bear in mind the degree of knowledge in which they continued; and this appears from what follows.

They glorified him not as God. No idea can be formed of God without including his eternity, power, wisdom, goodness, truth, righteousness, and mercy. His eternity appears evident, because he is the maker of all things — his power, because he holds all things in his hand and continues their existence — his wisdom, because he has arranged things in such an exquisite order — his goodness, for there is no other cause than himself, why he created all things, and no other reason, why he should be induced to preserve them — his justice, because in his government he punishes the guilty and defends the innocent — his mercy, because he bears with so much forbearance the perversity of men — and his truth, because he is unchangeable. He then who has a right notion of God ought to give him the praise due to his eternity, wisdom, goodness, and justice. Since men have not recognized these attributes in God, but have dreamt of him as though he were an empty phantom, they are justly said to have impiously robbed him of his own glory. Nor is it without reason that he adds, that they were not thankful, for there is no one who is not indebted to him for numberless benefits: yea, even on this account alone, because he has been pleased to reveal himself to us, he has abundantly made us indebted to him. But they became vain, etc.; that is, having forsaken the truth of God, they turned to the vanity of their own reason, all the acuteness of which is fading and passes away like vapor. And thus their foolish mind, being involved in darkness, could understand nothing aright but was carried away headlong, in various ways, into errors and delusions. Their unrighteousness was this — they quickly choked by their own depravity the seed of right knowledge, before it grew up to ripeness.

22. While they were thinking, etc. It is commonly inferred from this passage, that Paul alludes here to those philosophers, who assumed to themselves in a peculiar manner the reputation of wisdom; and it is thought that the design of his discourse is to show, that when the superiority of the great is brought down to nothing, the common people would have no reason to suppose that they had any thing worthy of being commended: but they seem to me to have been guided by too slender a reason; for it was not peculiar to the philosophers to suppose themselves wise in the knowledge of God, but it was equally common to all nations, and to all ranks of men. There were indeed none who sought not to form some ideas of the majesty of God, and to make him such a God as they could conceive him to be according to their own reason. This presumption I hold is not learned in the schools, but is innate, and comes with us, so to speak, from the womb. It is indeed evident, that it is an evil which has prevailed in all ages — that men have allowed themselves every liberty in coining superstitions. The arrogance then which is condemned here is this — that men sought to be of themselves wise, and to draw God down to a level with their own low condition, when they ought humbly to have given him his own glory. For Paul holds this principle, that none, except through their own fault, are unacquainted with the worship due to God; as though he said, “As they have proudly exalted themselves, they have become infatuated through the righteous judgment of God.” There is an obvious reason, which contravenes the interpretation which I reject; for the error of forming an image of God did not originate with the philosophers; but they, by their consent, approved of it as received from others.

23. And changed, etc. Having feigned such a God as they could comprehend according to their carnal reason, they were very far from acknowledging the true God: but devised a fictitious and a new god, or rather a phantom. And what he says is, that they changed the glory of God; for as though one substituted a strange child, so they departed from the true God. Nor are they to be excused for this pretense, that they believe that God dwells in heaven, and that they count not the wood to be God, but his image; for it is a high indignity to God, to form so gross an idea of his majesty as to dare to make an image of him. But from the wickedness of such a presumption none were exempt, neither priests, nor statesmen, nor philosophers, of whom the most sound-minded, even Plato himself, sought to find out some likeness of God.

The madness then here noticed, is, that all attempted to make for themselves an image of God; which was a certain proof that their notions of God were gross and absurd. And, first, they befouled the majesty of God by forming him in the likeness of a corruptible man: for I prefer this rendering to that of mortal man, which is adopted by Erasmus; for Paul sets not the immortality of God in opposition to the mortality of man, but that glory, which is subject to no defects, to the most wretched condition of man. And then, being not satisfied with so great a crime, they descended even to beasts and to those of the most filthy kind; by which their stupidity appeared still more evident. You may see an account of these abominations in Lactantius, in Eusebius, and in Augustine in his book on the city of God.

bolding and italics are mine, trying to draw the readers attention to the crucial issues. Unless i learn better this will be the pattern for the rest of the class readings.

{Take a moment and discuss the classes understanding of this section of Romans 1. What are the big topics?}

Calvin finished the Commentary in 1539, the same year as the major 2nd edition of Institutes. More than one commentator on Institutes has made a remark like "Institutes is deeply effected by Romans in general and Book 1 is an extended commentary on Romans 1". I believe that Calvin like many Biblical theologians through history have seen that Romans 1:19-23 has crucial verses for the question of why the heathen are inexcusable before God. I often use the catchphrase of "the first time you can plead ignorance when you do something wrong, but you can plead stupidity as many times after that as you want." God however doesn't allow this defense of ignorance, nor does Calvin, following closely in Paul's argument.


The readings and today's discussion will be from chapters 1-5. The big takehome point will be to try to see what it is that all people can see from the Creation, without reference to Scripture and without access to faith. This is a controversial topic not just within the visible Church but within the Reformed tradition, when i am aware of divergent opinions i will refer to them, but i don't expect to have the time nor ability to investigate far from Calvin's viewpoint.

This is the first chapter of our task--Institutes
Please consult the printed copy of McMahon's Longer Overview of Calvin's Institutes as printed in the readings packet for the section titles and summary.


Chapter 1.

1. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD AND OF OURSELVES MUTUALLY CONNECTED. - NATURE OF THIS CONNECTION.


[http://www.smartlink.net/~douglas/calvin/bk1ch01.html]

1.Without knowledge of self there is no knowledge of God

Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be deemed true and solid Wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. But as these are connected together by many ties, it is not easy to determine which of the two precedes and gives birth to the other. For, in the first place, no man can survey himself without forthwith turning his thoughts towards the God in whom he lives and moves; because it is perfectly obvious, that the endowments which we possess cannot possibly be from ourselves; nay, that our very being is nothing else than subsistence in God alone. In the second place, those blessings which unceasingly distil to us from heaven, are like streams conducting us to the fountain. Here, again, the infinitude of good which resides in God becomes more apparent from our poverty. In particular, the miserable ruin into which the revolt of the first man has plunged us, compels us to turn our eyes upwards; not only that while hungry and famishing we may thence ask what we want, but being aroused by fear may learn humility. For as there exists in man something like a world of misery, and ever since we were stript of the divine attire our naked shame discloses an immense series of disgraceful properties every man, being stung by the consciousness of his own unhappiness, in this way necessarily obtains at least some knowledge of God. Thus, our feeling of ignorance, vanity, want, weakness, in short, depravity and corruption, reminds us, (see Calvin on John 4: 10,) that in the Lord, and none but He, dwell the true light of wisdom, solid virtue, exuberant goodness. We are accordingly urged by our own evil things to consider the good things of God; and, indeed, we cannot aspire to Him in earnest until we have begun to be displeased with ourselves. For what man is not disposed to rest in himself? Who, in fact, does not thus rest, so long as he is unknown to himself; that is, so long as he is contented with his own endowments, and unconscious or unmindful of his misery? Every person, therefore, on coming to the knowledge of himself, is not only urged to seek God, but is also led as by the hand to find him.

2.Without knowledge of God there is no knowledge of self

On the other hand, it is evident that man never attains to a true self-knowledge until he have previously contemplated the face of God, and come down after such contemplation to look into himself. For (such is our innate pride) we always seem to ourselves just, and upright, and wise, and holy, until we are convinced, by clear evidence, of our injustice, vileness, folly, and impurity. Convinced, however, we are not, if we look to ourselves only, and not to the Lord also - He being the only standard by the application of which this conviction can be produced. For, since we are all naturally prone to hypocrisy, any empty semblance of righteousness is quite enough to satisfy us instead of righteousness itself. And since nothing appears within us or around us that is not tainted with very great impurity, so long as we keep our mind within the confines of human pollution, anything which is in some small degree less defiled delights us as if it were most pure just as an eye, to which nothing but black had been previously presented, deems an object of a whitish, or even of a brownish hue, to be perfectly white. Nay, the bodily sense may furnish a still stronger illustration of the extent to which we are deluded in estimating the powers of the mind. If, at mid-day, we either look down to the ground, or on the surrounding objects which lie open to our view, we think ourselves endued with a very strong and piercing eyesight; but when we look up to the sun, and gaze at it unveiled, the sight which did excellently well for the earth is instantly so dazzled and confounded by the refulgence, as to oblige us to confess that our acuteness in discerning terrestrial objects is mere dimness when applied to the sun. Thus too, it happens in estimating our spiritual qualities. So long as we do not look beyond the earth, we are quite pleased with our own righteousness, wisdom, and virtue; we address ourselves in the most flattering terms, and seem only less than demigods. But should we once begin to raise our thoughts to God, and reflect what kind of Being he is, and how absolute the perfection of that righteousness, and wisdom, and virtue, to which, as a standard, we are bound to be conformed, what formerly delighted us by its false show of righteousness will become polluted with the greatest iniquity; what strangely imposed upon us under the name of wisdom will disgust by its extreme folly; and what presented the appearance of virtuous energy will be condemned as the most miserable impotence. So far are those qualities in us, which seem most perfect, from corresponding to the divine purity.

3..Man before God's majesty

Hence that dread and amazement with which as Scripture uniformly relates, holy men were struck and overwhelmed whenever they beheld the presence of God. When we see those who previously stood firm and secure so quaking with terror, that the fear of death takes hold of them, nay, they are, in a manner, swallowed up and annihilated, the inference to be drawn is that men are never duly touched and impressed with a conviction of their insignificance, until they have contrasted themselves with the majesty of God. Frequent examples of this consternation occur both in the Book of Judges and the Prophetical Writings; so much so, that it was a common expression among the people of God, "We shall die, for we have seen the Lord." Hence the Book of Job, also, in humbling men under a conviction of their folly, feebleness, and pollution, always derives its chief argument from descriptions of the Divine wisdom, virtue, and purity. Nor without cause: for we see Abraham the readier to acknowledge himself but dust and ashes the nearer he approaches to behold the glory of the Lord, and Elijah unable to wait with unveiled face for His approach; so dreadful is the sight. And what can man do, man who is but rottenness and a worm, when even the Cherubim themselves must veil their faces in very terror? To this, undoubtedly, the Prophet Isaiah refers, when he says, (Isaiah 24: 23,) "The moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of Hosts shall reign;" i. e., when he shall exhibit his refulgence, and give a nearer view of it, the brightest objects will, in comparison, be covered with darkness.

But though the knowledge of God and the knowledge of ourselves are bound together by a mutual tie, due arrangement requires that we treat of the former in the first place, and then descend to the latter.

Chapter 2.

2. WHAT IT IS TO KNOW GOD,--TENDENCY OF THIS KNOWLEDGE.


[http://www.smartlink.net/~douglas/calvin/bk1ch02.html]

1.Piety is requisite for the knowledge of God

By the knowledge of God, I understand that by which we not only conceive that there is some God, but also apprehend what it is for our interest, and conducive to his glory, what, in short, it is befitting to know concerning him. For, properly speaking, we cannot say that God is known where there is no religion or piety. I am not now referring to that species of knowledge by which men, in themselves lost and under curse, apprehend God as a Redeemer in Christ the Mediator. I speak only of that simple and primitive knowledge, to which the mere course of nature would have conducted us, had Adam stood upright. For although no man will now, in the present ruin of the human race, perceive God to be either a father, or the author of salvation, or propitious in any respect, until Christ interpose to make our peace; still it is one thing to perceive that God our Maker supports us by his power, rules us by his providence, fosters us by his goodness, and visits us with all kinds of blessings, and another thing to embrace the grace of reconciliation offered to us in Christ. Since, then, the Lord first appears, as well in the creation of the world as in the general doctrine of Scripture, simply as a Creator, and afterwards as a Redeemer in Christ, - a twofold knowledge of him hence arises: of these the former is now to be considered, the latter will afterwards follow in its order.

But although our mind cannot conceive of God, without rendering some worship to him, it will not, however, be sufficient simply to hold that he is the only being whom all ought to worship and adore, unless we are also persuaded that he is the fountain of all goodness, and that we must seek everything in him, and in none but him. My meaning is: we must be persuaded not only that as he once formed the world, so he sustains it by his boundless power, governs it by his wisdom, preserves it by his goodness, in particular, rules the human race with justice and judgement, bears with them in mercy, shields them by his protection; but also that not a particle of light, or wisdom, or justice, or power, or rectitude, or genuine truth, will anywhere be found, which does not flow from him, and of which he is not the cause; in this way we must learn to expect and ask all things from him, and thankfully ascribe to him whatever we receive. For this sense of the divine perfections is the proper master to teach us piety, out of which religion springs. By piety I mean that union of reverence and love to God which the knowledge of his benefits inspires. For, until men feel that they owe everything to God, that they are cherished by his paternal care, and that he is the author of all their blessings, so that nought is to be looked for away from him, they will never submit to him in voluntary obedience; nay, unless they place their entire happiness in him, they will never yield up their whole selves to him in truth and sincerity.

2.Knowledge of God Involves trust and reverance

Those, therefore, who, in considering this question, propose to inquire what the essence of God is, only delude us with frigid speculations, - it being much more our interest to know what kind of being God is, and what things are agreeable to his nature. For, of what use is it to join Epicurus in acknowledging some God who has cast off the care of the world, and only delights himself in ease? What avails it, in short, to know a God with whom we have nothing to do? The effect of our knowledge rather ought to be, first, to teach us reverence and fear; and, secondly, to induce us, under its guidance and teaching, to ask every good thing from him, and, when it is received, ascribe it to him. For how can the idea of God enter your mind without instantly giving rise to the thought, that since you are his workmanship, you are bound, by the very law of creation, to submit to his authority? - that your life is due to him? - that whatever you do ought to have reference to him? If so, it undoubtedly follows that your life is sadly corrupted, if it is not framed in obedience to him, since his will ought to be the law of our lives. On the other hand, your idea of his nature is not clear unless you acknowledge him to be the origin and fountain of all goodness. Hence would arise both confidence in him, and a desire of cleaving to him, did not the depravity of the human mind lead it away from the proper course of investigation.

For, first of all, the pious mind does not devise for itself any kind of God, but looks alone to the one true God; nor does it feign for him any character it pleases, but is contented to have him in the character in which he manifests himself always guarding, with the utmost diligences against transgressing his will, and wandering, with daring presumptions from the right path. He by whom God is thus known perceiving how he governs all things, confides in him as his guardian and protector, and casts himself entirely upon his faithfulness, - perceiving him to be the source of every blessing, if he is in any strait or feels any want, he instantly recurs to his protection and trusts to his aid, - persuaded that he is good and merciful, he reclines upon him with sure confidence, and doubts not that, in the divine clemency, a remedy will be provided for his every time of need, - acknowledging him as his Father and his Lords he considers himself bound to have respect to his authority in all things, to reverence his majesty aim at the advancement of his glory, and obey his commands, - regarding him as a just judge, armed with severity to punish crimes, he keeps the judgement-seat always in his view. Standing in awe of it, he curbs himself, and fears to provoke his anger. Nevertheless, he is not so terrified by an apprehension of judgement as to wish he could withdraw himself, even if the means of escape lay before him; nays he embraces him not less as the avenger of wickedness than as the rewarder of the righteous; because he perceives that it equally appertains to his glory to store up punishment for the one, and eternal life for the other. Besides, it is not the mere fear of punishment that restrains him from sin. Loving and revering God as his father, honouring and obeying him as his master, although there were no hell, he would revolt at the very idea of offending him.

Such is pure and genuine religion, namely, confidence in God coupled with serious fear - fear, which both includes in it willing reverence, and brings along with it such legitimate worship as is prescribed by the law. And it ought to be more carefully considered that all men promiscuously do homage to God, but very few truly reverence him. On all hands there is abundance of ostentatious ceremonies, but sincerity of heart is rare.

Chapter 3.

3. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD HAS BEEN NATURALLY IMPLANTED IN THE HUMAN MIND.


[http://www.smartlink.net/~douglas/calvin/bk1ch03.html]

1.The character of this natural endowment

That there exists in the human minds and indeed by natural instinct, some sense of Deity, we hold to be beyond dispute, since God himself, to prevent any man from pretending ignorance, has endued all men with some idea of his Godhead, the memory of which he constantly renews and occasionally enlarges, that all to a man being aware that there is a God, and that he is their Maker, may be condemned by their own conscience when they neither worship him nor consecrate their lives to his service. Certainly, if there is any quarter where it may be supposed that God is unknown, the most likely for such an instance to exist is among the dullest tribes farthest removed from civilisation. But, as a heathen tells us, there is no nation so barbarous, no race so brutish, as not to be imbued with the conviction that there is a God. Even those who, in other respects, seem to differ least from the lower animals, constantly retain some sense of religion; so thoroughly has this common conviction possessed the mind, so firmly is it stamped on the breasts of all men. Since, then, there never has been, from the very first, any quarter of the globe, any city, any household even, without religion, this amounts to a tacit confession, that a sense of Deity is inscribed on every heart.

Nay, even idolatry is ample evidence of this fact. For we know how reluctant man is to lower himself, in order to set other creatures above him. Therefore, when he chooses to worship wood and stone rather than be thought to have no God, it is evident how very strong this impression of a Deity must be; since it is more difficult to obliterate it from the mind of man, than to break down the feelings of his nature, - these certainly being broken down, when, in opposition to his natural haughtiness, he spontaneously humbles himself before the meanest object as an act of reverence to God.

2.Religion is no arbitrary invention

It is most absurd, therefore, to maintain, as some do, that religion was devised by the cunning and craft of a few individuals, as a means of keeping the body of the people in due subjection, while there was nothing which those very individuals, while teaching others to worship God, less believed than the existence of a God. I readily acknowledge, that designing men have introduced a vast number of fictions into religion, with the view of inspiring the populace with reverence or striking them with terror, and thereby rendering them more obsequious; but they never could have succeeded in this, had the minds of men not been previously imbued will that uniform belief in God, from which, as from its seed, the religious propensity springs. And it is altogether incredible that those who, in the matter of religion, cunningly imposed on their ruder neighbours, were altogether devoid of a knowledge of God. For though in old times there were some, and in the present day not a few are found, who deny the being of a God, yet, whether they will or not, they occasionally feel the truth which they are desirous not to know. We do not read of any man who broke out into more unbridled and audacious contempt of the Deity than C. Caligula, and yet none showed greater dread when any indication of divine wrath was manifested. Thus, however unwilling, he shook with terror before the God whom he professedly studied to condemn. You may every day see the same thing happening to his modern imitators. The most audacious despiser of God is most easily disturbed, trembling at the sound of a falling leaf. How so, unless in vindication of the divine majesty, which smites their consciences the more strongly the more they endeavour to flee from it. They all, indeed, look out for hiding-places where they may conceal themselves from the presence of the Lord, and again efface it from their mind; but after all their efforts they remain caught within the net. Though the conviction may occasionally seem to vanish for a moment, it immediately returns, and rushes in with new impetuosity, so that any interval of relief from the gnawing of conscience is not unlike the slumber of the intoxicated or the insane, who have no quiet rest in sleep, but are continually haunted with dire horrific dreams. Even the wicked themselves, therefore, are an example of the fact that some idea of God always exists in every human mind.

3.Actual goodness is impossible

All men of sound judgement will therefore hold, that a sense of Deity is indelibly engraven on the human heart. And that this belief is naturally engendered in all, and thoroughly fixed as it were in our very bones, is strikingly attested by the contumacy of the wicked, who, though they struggle furiously, are unable to extricate themselves from the fear of God. Though Diagoras, and others of like stamps make themselves merry with whatever has been believed in all ages concerning religion, and Dionysus scoffs at the judgement of heaven, it is but a Sardonian grin; for the worm of conscience, keener than burning steel, is gnawing them within. I do not say with Cicero, that errors wear out by age, and that religion increases and grows better day by day. For the world (as will be shortly seen) labours as much as it can to shake off all knowledge of God, and corrupts his worship in innumerable ways. I only say, that, when the stupid hardness of heart, which the wicked eagerly court as a means of despising God, becomes enfeebled, the sense of Deity, which of all things they wished most to be extinguished, is still in vigour, and now and then breaks forth. Whence we infer, that this is not a doctrine which is first learned at school, but one as to which every man is, from the womb, his own master; one which nature herself allows no individual to forget, though many, with all their might, strive to do so.

Moreover, if all are born and live for the express purpose of learning to know God, and if the knowledge of God, in so far as it fails to produce this effect, is fleeting and vain, it is clear that all those who do not direct the whole thoughts and actions of their lives to this end fail to fulfil the law of their being. This did not escape the observation even of philosophers. For it is the very thing which Plato meant (in Phoed. et Theact.) when he taught, as he often does, that the chief good of the soul consists in resemblance to God; i.e., when, by means of knowing him, she is wholly transformed into him. Thus Gryllus, also, in Plutarch, (lib. guod bruta anim. ratione utantur,) reasons most skilfully, when he affirms that, if once religion is banished from the lives of men, they not only in no respect excel, but are, in many respects, much more wretched than the brutes, since, being exposed to so many forms of evil, they continually drag on a troubled and restless existence: that the only thing, therefore, which makes them superior is the worship of God, through which alone they aspire to immortality.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That there exists in the human minds and indeed by natural instinct, some sense of Deity, we hold to be beyond dispute, since God himself, to prevent any man from pretending ignorance, has endued all men with some idea of his Godhead, the memory of which he constantly renews and occasionally enlarges, that all to a man being aware that there is a God, and that he is their Maker, may be condemned by their own conscience when they neither worship him nor consecrate their lives to his service


In Latin this is referred to as the Sensus Divinitas (see: http://members.aol.com/rbiblech/MiscDoctrine/LatinTerms.htm)
In Book I, up to chapter 6, the general topic is called natural theology, what is it that natural man, unaided by Scripture can rightfully say about God as he looks at the world around him. (additionally at himself, and history, as well as creation)

Ask the class what are the major ways you could organize natural theology?
somekind of spectrum from total absence of God to a full blown theology of some type, mostly pantheism or panentheism.
Work on a one page handout of the potential answers given through time and different cultures, is this what Calvin had in mind? No he is replying to ancient Greek thought and the amalgamate that is R.C. medieval theology. He is probably unaware of Buddhist or Confucian theology but is certainly aware of Islamic.

The major point that Calvin wishes to prove is that no one at the Final Judgement can plead ignorance, maybe we can try stupidity but i don't think that will work either. The answer is to the question of "are the heathen saved?" or "what about those who have never heard the Gospel?" the point is that no one listens to that still small voice inside that tells them the nature of God as transcendent, as their Creator, and no one properly acts on that information to love, honor and worship God as is His rightful due.

Chapter 4.

4. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD STIFLED OR CORRUPTED, IGNORANTLY OR MALICIOUSLY.


[http://www.smartlink.net/~douglas/calvin/bk1ch04.html]

2.Conscious turning away from God

The expression of David, (Psalm 14: 1, 53: 1,) "The fool hassaid in his heart, There is no God," is primarily applied to thosewho, as will shortly farther appear, stifle the light of nature, andintentionally stupefy themselves. We see many, after they havebecome hardened in a daring course of sin, madly banishing allremembrance of God, though spontaneously suggested to them fromwithin, by natural sense. To show how detestable this madness is,the Psalmist introduces them as distinctly denying that there is aGod, because although they do not disown his essence, they rob himof his justice and providence, and represent him as sitting idly inheaven. Nothing being less accordant with the nature of God than tocast off the government of the world, leaving it to chance, and soto wink at the crimes of men that they may wanton with impunity inevil courses; it follows, that every man who indulges in security,after extinguishing all fear of divine judgement, virtually deniesthat there is a God. As a just punishment of the wicked, after theyhave closed their own eyes, God makes their hearts dull and heavy,and hence, seeing, they see not (Matt. 13:14-15; cf. Isa.6: 9-10 and Ps. 17:10). David, indeed, is the best interpreter of his own meaning, when he says elsewhere, the wicked has "no fear of God before his eyes," (Psalm 36: 1;) and, again, "He has said in his heart, God has forgotten; he hideth his face; he will never see it."(Ps. 10:11)

Thus although they are forced to acknowledgethat there is some God, they, however, rob him of his glory bydenying his power. For, as Paul declares, "If we believe not, heabideth faithful, he cannot deny himself," (2 Tim. 2: 13; so thosewho feign to themselves a dead and dumb idol, are truly said to denyGod. It is, moreover, to be observed, that though they struggle withtheir own convictions, and would fain not only banish God from theirminds, but from heaven also, their stupefaction is never so completeas to secure them from being occasionally dragged before the divinetribunal. Still, as no fear restrains them from rushing violently inthe face of God, so long as they are hurried on by that blindimpulse, it cannot be denied that their prevailing state of mind inregard to him is brutish oblivion.

Chapter 5.

5. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD CONSPICUOUS IN THE CREATION, AND CONTINUAL GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD.


[http://www.smartlink.net/~douglas/calvin/bk1ch05.html]

1.The clarity of God's self-disclosure strips us of every excuse

Since the perfection of blessedness consists in the knowledge of God (cf. John 17:3), he has been pleased, in order that none might be excluded from the means of obtaining felicity, not only to deposit in our minds that seed of religion of which we have already spoken, but so to manifest his perfections in the whole structure of the universe, and daily place himself in our view, that we cannot open our eyes without being compelled to behold him. His essence, indeed, is incomprehensible, utterly transcending all human thought; but on each of his works his glory is engraven in characters so bright, so distinct, and so illustrious, that none, however dull and illiterate, can plead ignorance as their excuse. Hence, with perfect truth, the Psalmist exclaims, "He covereth himself with light as with a garment," (Psalm 104: 2;) as if he had said, that God for the first time was arrayed in visible attire when, in the creation of the world, he displayed those glorious banners, on which, to whatever side we turn, we behold his perfections visibly portrayed. In the same place, the Psalmist aptly compares the expanded heavens to his royal tent, and says, "He layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters, maketh the clouds his chariot, and walketh upon the wings of the wind," sending forth the winds and lightnings as his swift messengers (Ps.104: 2-4). And because the glory of his power and wisdom is more refulgent in the firmament, it is frequently designated as his palace (Ps. 11:4). And, first, wherever you turn your eyes, there is no portion of the world, however minute, that does not exhibit at least some sparks of beauty; while it is impossible to contemplate the vast and beautiful fabric as it extends around, without being overwhelmed by the immense weight of glory. Hence, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews elegantly describes the visible worlds as images of the invisible, (Heb. 11: 3,) the elegant structure of the world serving us as a kind of mirror, in which we may behold God, though otherwise invisible. For the same reason, the Psalmist attributes language to celestial objects, a language which all nations understand, (Psalm 19: 1,) the manifestation of the Godhead being too clear to escape the notice of any people, however obtuse. The apostle Paul, stating this still more clearly, says, "That which may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead," (Rom. 1: 20.)

2.The divine wisdom displayed for all to see

In attestation of his wondrous wisdom, both the heavens and the earth present us with innumerable proofs not only those more recondite proofs which astronomy, medicine, and all the natural sciences, are designed to illustrate, but proofs which force themselves on the notice of the most illiterate peasant, who cannot open his eyes without beholding them. It is true, indeed, that those who are more or less intimately acquainted with those liberal studies are thereby assisted and enabled to obtain a deeper insight into the secret workings of divine wisdom. No man, however, though he be ignorant of these, is incapacitated for discerning such proofs of creative wisdom as may well cause him to break forth in admiration of the Creator. To investigate the motions of the heavenly bodies, to determine their positions, measure their distances, and ascertain their properties, demands skill, and a more careful examination; and where these are so employed, as the Providence of God is thereby more fully unfolded, so it is reasonable to suppose that the mind takes a loftier flight, and obtains brighter views of his glory. Still, none who have the use of their eyes can be ignorant of the divine skill manifested so conspicuously in the endless variety, yet distinct and well ordered array, of the heavenly host; and, therefore, it is plain that the Lord has furnished every man with abundant proofs of his wisdom. The same is true in regard to the structure of the human frame. To determine the connection of its parts, its symmetry and beauty, with the skill of a Galen, (Lib. De Usu Partium,) requires singular acuteness; and yet all men acknowledge that the human body bears on its face such proofs of ingenious contrivance as are sufficient to proclaim the admirable wisdom of its Maker.

6.The Creator reveals his lordship over the creation

Let each of us, therefore, in contemplating his own nature, remember that there is one God who governs all natures, and, in governing, wishes us to have respect to himself, to make him the object of our faith, worship, and adoration. Nothing, indeed, can be more preposterous than to enjoy those noble endowments which bespeak the divine presence within us, and to neglect him who, of his own good pleasure, bestows them upon us. In regard to his power, how glorious the manifestations by which he urges us to the contemplation of himself; unless, indeed, we pretend not to know whose energy it is that by a word sustains the boundless fabric of the universe - at one time making heaven reverberate with thunder, sending forth the scorching lightning, and setting the whole atmosphere in a blaze; at another, causing the raging tempests to blow, and forthwith, in one moment, when it so pleases him, making a perfect calm; keeping the sea, which seems constantly threatening the earth with devastation, suspended as it were in air; at one time, lashing it into fury by the impetuosity of the winds; at another, appeasing its rage, and stilling all its waves. Here we might refer to those glowing descriptions of divine power, as illustrated by natural events, which occur throughout Scripture; but more especially in the book of Job, and the prophecies of Isaiah. These, however, I purposely omit, because a better opportunity of introducing them will be found when I come to treat of the Scriptural account of the creation. (Infra, chap. 14 s. 1, 2, 20, sq.) I only wish to observe here, that this method of investigating the divine perfections, by tracing the lineaments of his countenance as shadowed forth in the firmament and on the earth, is common both to those within and to those without the pale of the Church. From the power of God we are naturally led to consider his eternity since that from which all other things derive their origin must necessarily be selfexistent and eternal. Moreover, if it be asked what cause induced him to create all things at first, and now inclines him to preserve them, we shall find that there could be no other cause than his own goodness. But if this is the only cause, nothing more should be required to draw forth our love towards him; every creature, as the Psalmist reminds us, participating in his mercy. "His tender mercies are over all his works," (Ps. 145: 9.)

7.God's government and judgment

In the second class of God's works, namely those which are above the ordinary course of nature, the evidence of his perfections are in every respect equally clear. For in conducting the affairs of men, he so arranges the course of his providence, as daily to declare, by the clearest manifestations, that though all are in innumerable ways the partakers of his bounty, the righteous are the special objects of his favour, the wicked and profane the special objects of his severity. It is impossible to doubt his punishment of crimes; while at the same time he, in no unequivocal manner, declares that he is the protector, and even the avenger of innocence, by shedding blessings on the good, helping their necessities, soothing and solacing their griefs, relieving their sufferings, and in all ways providing for their safety. And though he often permits the guilty to exult for a time with impunity, and the innocent to be driven to and fro in adversity, nay, even to be wickedly and iniquitously oppressed, this ought not to produce any uncertainty as to the uniform justice of all his procedure. Nay, an opposite inference should be drawn. When any one crime calls forth visible manifestations of his anger, it must be because he hates all crimes; and, on the other hand, his leaving many crimes unpunished, only proves that there is a judgement in reserve, when the punishment now delayed shall be inflicted. In like manner, how richly does he supply us with the means of contemplating his mercy when, as frequently happens, he continues to visit miserable sinners with unwearied kindness, until he subdues their depravity, and woos them back with more than a parent's fondness?

10.The purpose of this knowledge of God

By the knowledge thus acquired, we ought not only to be stimulated to worship God, but also aroused and elevated to the hope of future life. For, observing that the manifestations which the Lord gives both of his mercy and severity are only begun and incomplete, we ought to infer that these are doubtless only a prelude to higher manifestations, of which the full display is reserved for another state. Conversely, when we see the righteous brought into affliction by the ungodly, assailed with injuries, overwhelmed with calumnies, and lacerated by insult and contumely, while, on the contrary, the wicked flourish, prosper, acquire ease and honour, and all these with impunity, we ought forthwith to infer, that there will be a future life in which iniquity shall receive its punishment, and righteousness its reward. Moreover, when we observe that the Lord often lays his chastening rod on the righteous, we may the more surely conclude, that far less will the righteous ultimately escape the scourges of his anger. There is a well-known passage in Augustine, (De Civitat. Dei, lib. 1 c. 8,) "Were all sin now visited with open punishment, it might be thought that nothing was reserved for the final judgement; and, on the other hand, were no sin now openly punished, it might be supposed there was no divine providence."

It must be acknowledged, therefore, that in each of the works of God, and more especially in the whole of them taken together, the divine perfections are delineated as in a picture, and the whole human race thereby invited and allured to acquire the knowledge of God, and, in consequence of this knowledge, true and complete felicity. Moreover, while his perfections are thus most vividly displayed, the only means of ascertaining their practical operation and tendency is to descend into ourselves, and consider how it is that the Lord there manifests his wisdom, power, and energy, - how he there displays his justice, goodness, and mercy. For although David (Psalm 92: 6) justly complains of the extreme infatuation of the ungodly in not pondering the deep counsels of God, as exhibited in the government of the human race, what he elsewhere says (Psalm 40) is most true, that the wonders of the divine wisdom in this respect are more in number than the hairs of our head. But I leave this topic at present, as it will be more fully considered afterwards in its own place, (Book I. c. 16, see. 6-9.)

(Man nevertheless, failing to know and worship him, falls into superstition and confusion, 11-12)
11. The evidence of God in creation does not profit us

Bright, however, as is the manifestation which God gives both of himself and his immortal kingdom in the mirror of his works, so great is our stupidity, so dull are we in regard to these bright manifestations, that we derive no benefit from them. For in regard to the fabric and admirable arrangement of the universe, how few of us are there who, in lifting our eyes to the heavens, or looking abroad on the various regions of the earth, ever think of the Creator? Do we not rather overlook Him, and sluggishly content ourselves with a view of his works? And then in regard to supernatural events, though these are occurring every day, how few are there who ascribe them to the ruling providence of God - how many who imagine that they are casual results produced by the blind evolutions of the wheel of chance? Even when under the guidance and direction of these events, we are in a manner forced to the contemplation of God, (a circumstance which all must occasionally experience,) and are thus led to form some impressions of Deity, we immediately fly off to carnal dreams and depraved fictions, and so by our vanity corrupt heavenly truth. This far, indeed, we differ from each other, in that every one appropriates to himself some peculiar error; but we are all alike in this, that we substitute monstrous fictions for the one living and true God - a disease not confined to obtuse and vulgar minds, but affecting the noblest, and those who, in other respects, are singularly acute.

How lavishly in this respect have the whole body of philosophers betrayed their stupidity and want of sense? To say nothing of the others whose absurdities are of a still grosser description, how completely does Plato, the soberest and most religious of them all, lose himself in his round globe? What must be the case with the rest, when the leaders, who ought to have set them an example, commit such blunders, and labour under such hallucinations? In like manner, while the government of the world places the doctrine of providence beyond dispute, the practical result is the same as if it were believed that all things were carried hither and thither at the caprice of chance; so prone are we to vanity and error. I am still referring to the most distinguished of the philosophers, and not to the common herd, whose madness in profaning the truth of God exceeds all bounds.

12.The manifestation of God is choked by human superstition and the error of the philosophers

Hence that immense flood of error with which the whole world is overflowed. Every individual mind being a kind of labyrinth, it is not wonderful, not only that each nation has adopted a variety of fictions, but that almost every man has had his own god. To the darkness of ignorance have been added presumption and wantonness, and hence there is scarcely an individual to be found without some idol or phantom as a substitute for Deity. Like water gushing forth from a large and copious spring, immense crowds of gods have issued from the human mind, every man giving himself full license, and devising some peculiar form of divinity, to meet his own views. It is unnecessary here to attempt a catalogue of the superstitions with which the world was overspread. The thing were endless; and the corruptions themselves, though not a word should be said, furnish abundant evidence of the blindness of the human mind. I say nothing of the rude and illiterate vulgar; but among the philosophers who attempted, by reason and learning, to pierce the heavens, what shameful disagreement! The higher any one was endued with genius, and the more he was polished by science and art, the more specious was the colouring which he gave to his opinions. All these, however, if examined more closely, will be found to be vain show. The Stoics plumed themselves on their acuteness, when they said that the various names of God might be extracted from all the parts of nature, and yet that his unity was not thereby divided: as if we were not already too prone to vanity, and had no need of being presented with an endless multiplicity of gods, to lead us further and more grossly into error. The mystic theology of the Egyptians shows how sedulously they laboured to be thought rational on this subject. And, perhaps, at the first glance, some show of probability might deceive the simple and unwary; but never did any mortal devise a scheme by which religion was not foully corrupted.

This endless variety and confusion emboldened the Epicureans, and other gross despisers of piety, to cut off all sense of God. For when they saw that the wisest contradicted each others they hesitated not to infer from their dissensions, and from the frivolous and absurd doctrines of each, that men foolishly, and to no purpose, brought torment upon themselves by searching for a God, there being none: and they thought this inference safe, because it was better at once to deny God altogether, than to feign uncertain gods, and thereafter engage in quarrels without end. They, indeed, argue absurdly, or rather weave a cloak for their impiety out of human ignorance; though ignorance surely cannot derogate from the prerogatives of God. But since all confess that there is no topic on which such difference exists, both among learned and unlearned, the proper inference is, that the human mind, which thus errs in inquiring after God, is dull and blind in heavenly mysteries. Some praise the answer of Simonides, who being asked by King Hero what God was, asked a day to consider. When the king next day repeated the question, he asked two days; and after repeatedly doubling the number of days, at length replied, "The longer I consider, the darker the subject appears." He, no doubt, wisely suspended his opinion, when he did not see clearly: still his answer shows, that if men are only naturally taught, instead of having any distinct, solid, or certain knowledge, they fasten only on contradictory principles, and, in consequence, worship an unknown God (cf. Acts 17:23).

15. We have no excuse

But though we are deficient in natural powers which might enable us to rise to a pure and clear knowledge of God, still, as the dullness which prevents us is within, there is no room for excuse. We cannot plead ignorance, without being at the same time convicted by our own consciences both of sloth and ingratitude. It were, indeed, a strange defence for man to pretend that he has no ears to hear the truth, while dumb creatures have voices loud enough to declare it; to allege that he is unable to see that which creatures without eyes demonstrate, to excuse himself on the ground of weakness of mind, while all creatures without reason are able to teach. Wherefore, when we wander and go astray, we are justly shut out from every species of excuse, because all things point to the right path. But while man must bear the guilt of corrupting the seed of divine knowledge so wondrously deposited in his mind, and preventing it from bearing good and genuine fruit, it is still most true that we are not sufficiently instructed by that bare and simple, but magnificent testimony which the creatures bear to the glory of their Creator. For no sooner do we, from a survey of the world, obtain some slight knowledge of Deity, than we pass by the true God, and set up in his stead the dream and phantom of our own brain, drawing away the praise of justice, wisdom, and goodness, from the fountain-head, and transferring it to some other quarter. Moreover, by the erroneous estimate we form, we either so obscure or pervert his daily works, as at once to rob them of their glory and the author of them of his just praise.

research links:

from: http://www.modernreformation.org/mr98/janfeb/mr9801natural.html
As we see in his opening to the Institutes, Calvin's great concern in relating faith and reason is pastoral rather than philosophical. While Thomas Aquinas begins his magisterial work by inquiring into the nature of God as supreme being, Calvin's opening question is both practical and existential. The knowledge of God and of oneself, he argues, is dialectical (i.e., getting to know God and ourselves is a process that moves back and forth). Furthermore, this knowledge is chiefly concerned with the relationship between God and humanity. Far from being either a rationalistic or mystical end in itself, contemplating God leads us to self-knowledge. Its chief yield is the realization that we are naked, stripped of all righteousness and any basis for self-confidence. The purpose of this knowledge, then, is to lead to an existential crisis (1.1.1-2). This knowledge of our nakedness is an awareness of our need, but the knowledge that Christ is the solution to our problem is found exclusively in special revelation.

Calvin's approach thus stands in sharp contrast to the goals of the philosophers. Descartes' objective is "to demonstrate the existence of God and the soul."1 Plato aims to contemplate the essence of Being. But Calvin writes: "What wonderfully impressed us under the name of wisdom will stink in its very foolishness. What wore the face of power will prove itself the most miserable weakness. That is, what in us seems perfection itself corresponds ill to the purity of God" (1.1.2). The knowledge of God, far from reinforcing our philosophical and religious presuppositions, undoes them.

for further research links:
http://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pa401.htm
It is evident, from the lead position Calvin assigns it in the Institutes, that the epistemological question is fundamental to Calvin's theology.  All men inescapably know God the Creator; even the unbeliever retains some epistemological abilities which should draw him to God.  Calvin maintains that all men have a certain understanding and knowledge over the created order, yet he is not able to find the truth i.e., heavenly knowledge, due to his sin (cf. Institutes, pp. 272-274).  This heavenly knowledge, which is identical with faith, is greater than rational proof or empirical perception.  Contrary to the evidentialist's apologetic, which looks to logic and rational proof for the foundation of this heavenly knowledge, Calvin recognized that this knowledge must begin in revelation as found in Scripture.  Knowledge is foundational to faith, yet the necessary knowledge comes only when one submits to the truth as revealed by God in Scripture.  It is only in Scripture that man may rightly comprehend God as He really is (holy Creator), and at the same time comprehend himself as he really is (sinful creature).  All men have a belief in God (even those who do not believe), yet this is not the same as saving knowledge.  Calvin's apologetic demands that in order to properly know the world and ourselves we must first know God; and to know God, we must first rightly know ourselves and the world.  He states, "As a consequence, we must infer that man is never sufficiently touched and affected by the awareness of his lowly state until he has compared himself with God's majesty" (p. 39).


http://www.piney.com/Reformation.html i don't know what to make of the site in general, but this page leads to some interesting stuff on Calvin and the Reformation

found a link to search major libraries, a requirement for interlibrary loan:
library search site--http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/


In lesson 3 i tried to make the point that Institutes is not a systematic theology.
See the following for comparison:
Hodge's systematic theology is at: http://www.dabar.org/Theology/Hodge/TableofContents/Content_Intro.htm
Dabney's at: http://www.pbministries.org/R.%20L.%20Dabney/Systematic%20Theology/systematic_theology.htm

http://www.butte.cc.ca.us/~machuga/Outline%20Separated/Page%20Overview.html
This course is a philosophical defense of Thomas Aquinas’ proofs for the existence of God and the classical reconciliation of divine sovereignty with human freedom that he shared with Augustine and Calvin. The intended audience is both the committed Christian and the intelligent inquirer. Augustine, Aquinas and Calvin provide a coherent and intelligible account of God and his sovereign grace that makes a straightforward reading of five key verses—Romans 1:18-20, Romans 9:16-21, I Tim. 2:4, Phil. 2:12-13 and Eph. 2:8. For the committed Christian, this is a significant point in favor of their philosophy.

on the topic of natural theology:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608b.htm
The Catholic Church would also say:
Lumen Gentium 16: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience [and natural law] -- those too may achieve eternal salvation.
thanks to clskinner at: http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=8024136#post8024136

lecture by a. plantinga on naturalism at: http://hisdefense.org/articles/ap001pf.html
http://hisdefense.org/audio/ap_audio.html
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/texts/Reid%20-%20Essays.htm

books:
i need to start getting the book based research into these notes. Start now and with the 2nd version of the previous lessons, available on the net.

proposed in print references:
frame's two books on the doctrine of the knowledge of God.
plantinga's books on warranted knowledge.

finish reading book 1 again, but this time outloud and with a very strong emphasis on what is important enough to be explained and taught in the class.

websites of interest:
as always review: http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/calvin.html

http://solo4.abac.com/echoes/museum/apol8.htm
http://philofreligion.homestead.com/files/Beversluis.html
http://capo.org/premise/97/Dec/p971205.html
http://www.solideogloria.ch/calvin/english/hidden.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/pkrightr.htm
http://www.vts.edu/2003/Fall%20Semester%202002/ST%201A/DCopley%20Notes/first%20quater%20notes.htm
http://www.homestead.com/philofreligion/files/ProspectusNew.htm
http://www.homestead.com/philofreligion/files/CalvinPaper.htm !

on the two books of God, the book of works and the book of words: http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/oct1982/v39-3-article2.htm
perhaps the best organizing principle on general and special revelation, although Calvin does not use it as does Francis Bacon in the early 17thC.
"We have available to us not just one book of God, but two: the book of God's word in Scripture, which concerns the ultimate nature and destiny of humanity, and the book of God's works in nature, which deals with the conditions of the created order…. The entire flowering of modern culture, and derivatively of modern technology, grew out of this essentially religious conception of the two books of God."



note: i am a week late on getting this written, mostly because the topic is of such interest and importance to me that i am deeply involved in reading. I believe that a genuine Christian epistemology is being worked out in our day as a result of the conflicts of theology and science, essentially science and philosophy is forcing the intellectuals of the church to really define the issues, Calvin with his doctrine of the personalness, the persuasiveness of knowledge is playing an important role in this through the work of Alvin Plantinga and Michael Polanyi. Thanks needs to go to: PAUL, IAIN: KNOWLEDGE OF GOD: Calvin, Einstein and Polanyi

search strings:
http://www.google.com/search?q=augustine+calvin+theory+of+knowledge&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=20&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=calvin+institutes+knowledge+of+god+creation&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N

WCF
CHAP. IV. - Of Creation.

1. It pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, in the beginning, to create, or make of nothing, the world, and all things therein whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days; and all very good.

2. After God had made all other creatures, He created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, endued with knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness, after His own image, having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it: and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject unto change. Beside this law written in their hearts, they received a command, not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which while they kept, they were happy in their communion with God,and had dominion over the creatures.

-=-=-=-=-

at:
http://www.creeds.net/reformed/gnvconf.htm
find:

The Confession of Faith - Confession de la Foy

The Genevan Confession was credited to John Calvin in 1536 by Beza who said Calvin wrote it as a formula of Christian doctrine suited to the church at Geneva. More recent scholarship attributes it to William Farel but in all likelihood Calvin did have considerable influence on the document. Indeed the records of the Senate at Geneva indicate that the confession was presented by both Farel and Calvin to the magistrates who received it and set it aside for more detailed examination.

-=-=-=-=-=-
i found the term visualization epistemology while working on lessons 5 and 6, need to get back to this search string when there is more time: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=+visualist+epistemology&btnG=Google+Search

---

from: http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=8641813&postcount=14

Calvin is probably the first one in modern history to refer to God's general revelation in nature as a book when he wrote in 1536 (25 years before Bacon was born):

"Just as old or bleary-eyed men and those with weak vision, if you thrust before them a most beautiful volume, even if you recognize it to be some sort of writing, yet can scarcely construe two words, but with the aid of spectacles will begin to read distinctly; so Scripture, gathering up the otherwise confused knowledge of God in our minds, having dispersed our dullness, clearly shows us the true God." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Bk. I Ch. VI Sec. 1)—The year 1536

Of course the calvinistic Belgic Confession copied Calvin when published in 1561, the year Francis Bacon was born, in Article 2 stating:

“We know him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe, since that universe is before our eyes like a beautiful book in which all creatures, great and small, are as letters to make us ponder the invisible things of God … Second, he makes himself known to us more openly by his holy and divine Word, as much as we need in this life, for his glory and for the salvation of his own.”

Francis Bacon was raised under Calvinism by his deeply Calvinistic mother and her father the great Calvinist and Puritan Arthur Cooke who was also the tudor to the young and devoutly Reformed Protestant King Edward VI. Bacon studied Calvin and had Calvin’s books in his library. Bacon was so reformed and knowledgable about science that he became known as "The Reformer of Science." Bacon saw no conflict between his faith and his work as a scientist and he only reiterated John Calvin, the Belgic Confession, Psalm 19 and Romans 2, all of which he had directly studied, when he wrote:

There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power.

Roland Mushat Frye is a Professor of English Literature at the University of Pennsylvania. The author of several works in his field, he is a member of the Editorial Council of THEOLOGY TODAY and has recently been appointed as a resident fellow for at the newly established Center of Theological Inquiry at Princeton.

Frye agrees with this assesment when he wrote;

“Calvin and Bacon thus both insisted that the Bible and nature were the two books of God, crafted for two different ends and to be studied by us with two different methodologies. To round out the application of the distinction between the two books of God in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, let me add to the words of the leading theologian of the Reformed tradition and its leading scientific philosopher, the words of its greatest poet, John Milton. In Paradise Lost, Milton has the archangel Raphael say to Adam:

‘To ask or search I blame thee not, for Heav'n
Is as the Book of God before thee set,
Wherein to read his wond'rous works….’

In the history of education and of learned inquiry, Francis Bacon's eloquent arguments for the advancement of science had a profound influence, as did John Calvin's brilliant arguments for the separate integrity of science and theology. In important ways, these two great thinkers implemented the development of modern education. John Milton and many other Puritan leaders of the English seventeenth century adopted that ancient homiletical metaphor of the two books of God, and urged the systematic study not only of the book of the Bible but also the book of nature.”

-=-=-=-=-=-
version information:
version 1.0
dated 24 May 2004 at 12:29