The Second Helvetic Confession Chapter 13
Of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, of the Promises, and of
the Spirit and Letter
The Ancients Had Evangelical
Promises. The Gospel, is indeed, opposed to the law. For the law works wrath
and announces a curse, whereas the Gospel preaches grace and blessing. John
says: For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus
Christ (John 1:17). Yet not withstanding it is most certain that those who were
before the law and under the law, were not altogether destitute of the Gospel.
For they had extraordinary evangelical promises such as these are: The seed of
the woman shall bruise the serpent's head (Gen. 3:15). In thy seed shall all the
nations of the earth be blessed (Gen. 22:18). The scepter shall not depart from
Judah . . . until he comes (Gen. 49:10). The Lord will raise up a prophet from
among his own brethren (Deut. 18:15; Acts 3:22), etc.
<Paul goes to great length to show how Abraham was saved
by faith, not works, and that of promise (Gospel). One of the landmarks of most dispensationalists is that there
was a separate program for the saints of the Old Testament and another
altogether for the New Testament. To
this most add there is a completely separate program for the nation of Israel.
God is most consistent, and it is written that God does not change.
One of the marks of an earthly sovereign is that he does not change or in
the words of the Bible Arepent@
from that which he has said or done. To do so would infer he is not Aperfect.@
Though we would hope all would see the error of this applied to man, surely we
also can see if such change was a mark on the character of an earthly monarch,
it would be much more so, and of necessity then be impossible for God. The
thesis of this paragraph however seems to contradict what was established in the
preceding chapter. A paradigm shift in administration, the more perfect Word of
God now being manifest, but I would disagree the two stand opposed to each
other.@ >
The Promises Twofold. And
we acknowledge that two kinds of promises were revealed to the fathers, as also
to us. For some were of present or earthly things, such as the promises of the
Land of Canaan and of victories, and as the promise today still of daily bread.
Others were then and are still now of heavenly and eternal things, namely,
divine grace, remission of sins, and eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ.
<We live as dual citizens so to speak and there is both
an earthly and present promise/reward as well as an eternal one.
Perhaps we see this best in the sins of the elect where there is a double
price extracted. Today sin results
in human misery and the sufferings of the consequences of wrong action and
deeds. At the same time sin removes
from the heavenly rewards that will be for the believer in his eternal life in
and with Christ. >
The Fathers Also Had Not Only
Carnal but Spiritual Promises. Moreover, the ancients had not only external
and earthly but also spiritual and heavenly promises in Christ. Peter says: The
prophets who prophesied of the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired
about this salvation (I Peter 1:10). Wherefore the apostle Paul also said: The
Gospel of God was promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy
Scriptures (Rom. 1:2). Thereby it is clear that the ancients were not entirely
destitute of the whole Gospel.
<Christ said search the Scriptures (the Old Testament)
for they are those that speak of me. All
of the Old Testament with all of its types, shadows and ceremony pointed to the
coming of the Messiah. The promise
was not only for present physical blessing, but eternal reward. While more
manifest or visible in the New Testament, it is also not a change to the
promise, but its fulfillment. We
need caution here less we give wiggle room to the dispensationalist and his
marred exegesis that creates many errors if not open heresy. >
What Is the Gospel Properly
Speaking? And although our fathers had the Gospel in this way in the
writings of the prophets by which they attained salvation in Christ through
faith, yet the Gospel is properly called glad and joyous news, in which, first
by John the Baptist, then by Christ the Lord himself, and afterwards by the
apostles and their successors, is preached to us in the world that God has now
performed what he promised from the beginning of the world, and has sent, nay
more, has given us his only Son and in him reconciliation with the Father, the
remission of sins, all fullness and everlasting life. Therefore, the history
delineated by the four Evangelists and explaining how these things were done or
fulfilled by Christ, what things Christ taught and did, and that those who
believe in him have all fullness, is rightly called the Gospel. The preaching
and writings of the apostles, in which the apostles explain for us how the Son
was given to us by the Father, and in him everything that has to do with life
and salvation, is also rightly called evangelical doctrine, so that not even
today, if sincerely preached, does it lose its illustrious title.
< “What is the Gospel properly speaking?”
The Gospel is the good news that God has made the promises given to the
fathers of a Savior has been made manifest in the Son of God being incarnate as
foretold in the prophets. The
Gospel is really very short and summed up in John 3:16.
In fact most of the Bible is not about the Gospel, but about how to
glorify God, as God progressively reveals Himself and His desire for man by
giving to man those things God commands man to do and reveals what He wants man
to be. >
Of the Spirit and the Letter.
That same preaching of the Gospel is also called by the apostle the spirit and
the ministry of the spirit because by faith it becomes effectual and living in
the ears, nay more, in the hearts of believers through the illumination of the
Holy Spirit (II Cor. 3:6). For the letter, which is opposed to the Spirit,
signifies everything external, but especially the doctrine of the law which,
without the Spirit and faith, works wrath and provokes sin in the minds of those
who do not have a living faith. For this reason the apostle calls it the
ministry of death. In this connection the saying of the apostle is pertinent:
The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. And false apostles preached a
corrupted Gospel, having combined it with the law, as if Christ could not save
without the law.
<Care needs to be exercised in the understanding of the
Spirit and the letter. All
Scripture is God breathed, a divine Word. It
is precious and to be obeyed. At
the same time as Christ often showed with deeds accomplished on the Sabbath and
in other ways contrary to the tradition of Moses showed the Law was not intended
to save man, but to serve man by the revelation of God and His eternal plan for
His children. The law revealed sin.
I fail to grasp that the law Aprovokes@
sin. Unable to understand the
intent of the author here, I simply render the understanding of the law as given
in the Scripture and let this phrase lie. The
law was never intended to save any, but to reveal sin and from the pen of Peter,
we find that the law indeed became the definition of sin.
Hereby Peter testified that sin is the transgression of the law.
The Westminster standards render it this way: “Sin is not being or
doing what God has commanded.” >
The Sects. Such were the
Ebionites said to be, who were descended from Ebion the heretic, and the
Nazarites who were formerly called Mineans. All these we condemn, while
preaching the pure Gospel and teaching that believers are justified by the
Spirit alone,[1] and not by the law. A more detailed exposition of this matter
will follow presently under the heading of justification.
<As the Word is a divine Word and cannot be added to,
nor deleted from, or changed, yet must not contradict itself; the revelation is
progressive. One administration
flows from the former, one truth given form and light from the former.
The two then were never intended to be combined in this way, but to
establish the whole truth and counsel of God.
God’s Word is one and of a unity even as the Godhead is, as such it is
proper to speak of God’s word in the singular.
As Christ said then, the law is not set aside, but it is fulfilled, or
finished in its original purpose, to reveal sin and point man toward God.
This divine Word was made clear in the latter day (of the Old Testament)
by the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Messiah.
The writer of Hebrews renders the teaching, “God having spoken more
clearly in these last days through His Son.” >
The Teaching of the Gospel Is
Not New, but Most Ancient Doctrine. And although the teaching of the Gospel,
compared with the teaching of the Pharisees concerning the law, seemed to be a
new doctrine when first preached by Christ (which Jeremiah also prophesied
concerning the New Testament), yet actually it not only was and still is an old
doctrine (even if today it is called new by the Papists when compared with the
teaching now received among them), but is the most ancient of all in the world.
For God predestinated from eternity to save the world through Christ, and he has
disclosed to the world through the Gospel this his predestination and eternal
counsel (II Tim. 2:9 f.). Hence it is evident that the religion and teaching of
the Gospel among all who ever were, are and will be, is the most ancient of all.
Wherefore we assert that all who say that the religion and teaching of the
Gospel is a faith which has recently arisen, being scarcely thirty years old,
err disgracefully and speak shamefully of the eternal counsel of God. To them
applies the saying of Isaiah the prophet: Woe to those who call evil good and
good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for
sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isa. 5:20).
<That which we today call Arminianism is not new.
The error of a changing revelation and different seasons, eras, or
whatever other term whereby God now deals differently with His people is an old
error that has plagued the church from her beginning with the Apostles.
Much of this error perhaps finds root in the fact that the first New
Testament churches were predominately Jewish, who simply added Christ to
existing traditions. It is an error
that the reformers all fought against, and yet raises its ugly head in the world
of the church today. Without
official statistics, I would submit that there are more denominations and
individual believers embracing this evil admixture of law and Gospel today than
those of the Reformed traditions.
As noted earlier concerning interpretation and establishing
doctrines, use care less that which is presently under consideration cause
contradiction or cause problems in another place. I believe that these two
chapters are a good example of this. Bullinger ends okay, but can cause much
confusion with the terms chosen. On the surface these two chapters oppose each
other in some key areas. It is only when the two are considered together and
close attention given we can see the author wasn’t trying to present the two
Testaments as opposing forces, but rather to show the unity. Some of this comes
from trying to be concise as required in a confession and part from the
limitations of language in trying to give visibility to spiritual concepts.
Either we create new words that are of the church and her vocabulary
alone, or we stand the chance of being called long winded in trying to use
contemporary language to convey these divine thoughts. I share this because all
too many of us want everything boiled down to the bare bones. However it is the
diligent student who gains insight and understands Christ.
When considering complex situations it is often necessary to look at
single points in a sequence. The church does this in her systematic theologies.
However at some point we must back off and see the whole, where most often
single lines of division become blurred and we can begin to see the unity of all
Scripture. >
1. The
original manuscript has "Christ" instead of "Spirit."
