In him was life;
and the life was the light of men (John 1:4).
And the
light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not (John
1:5).
That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world (John 1:9).
COMMON GRACE ARGUMENT:
Q. “With regard to John chapter 1, verse 4 says, ‘in him [that is, Christ] was life; and the life was “the light of men.”’ What is this referring to? Some use this passage in support of ‘common grace.’ … Verse 9 speaks of Christ as ‘the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.’ In what sense does Christ ‘lighteth every man’ if not by a ‘common grace’?”
(I)
Prof. David J. Engelsma
The subject in the opening verses of John 1 is not Jesus as incarnate—the man, Jesus—but the person of the eternal Son of God, who is the Word who is God. By him, that is, the eternal second person of the Trinity, all things were made, including the human race in Adam. He is the personal Word spoken by God, “Let there be,” who called all things into existence and by which all things, including the human race in Adam, had and still have their existence. This Word, the second person of the Trinity, became incarnate in Jesus. Nevertheless, the subject in verse 9 is not the incarnate Jesus, but his divine person. The distinction is important.
This second person, who made all in creative power and still gives existence to all by his divine power, lights every human who comes into the world (v. 9). This light is natural human reason by which to some degree every human understands earthly things and even knows the existence of God and that he must be worshipped. This corresponds to the spiritual understanding that all humans lack (v. 10) and that the eternal Son as the incarnate Jesus gives to his own elect (vv. 12ff.). There is a comparison of the natural understanding that the eternal Son, who created all, bestows on all humans, that really makes them truly human, and the spiritual understanding that this eternal Son *as the incarnate Jesus* bestows on those whom the Father has given him unto salvation. One important implication of this is that mankind owes its natural understanding of earthly things to the person of Jesus, as creator and sustainer of all, including the human race. Unbelieving mankind is doubly in debt to Jesus, therefore; it owes him its natural understanding of earthly things, and it is guilty of refusing to believe on him.
But the natural understanding—rationality, we might say—is not grace for unbelieving mankind. The text itself of John 1 teaches this. The reality of the Word’s light does not bestow divine favor or grace on the world of humanity outside of faith in Jesus, but renders mankind inexcusable (v. 10). There is the grace of God only to those humans who receive him by faith (v. 12). It is the purpose of the passage to teach that, although all humans are naturally enlightened by the Word that made them all and bestows rationality upon them all, they inexcusably reject this Word. The revelation of nature in itself, apart from the special revelation of the gospel of the incarnate Son of God, is not a means of the grace of God, but only an instrument of further blinding and hardening. The message of the passage is exactly that there is the grace of God only in the gospel of the incarnate Word, Jesus. To find grace in natural revelation is to contradict the passage at its heart.
And then, if the passage is indeed teaching a grace of God in the revelation of the Word in nature, it teaches a *saving* grace in nature. The subject throughout is a grace that saves. The world knew the Word not, *with a knowledge unto salvation* (v. 10). Receiving the Word means becoming the sons of God (v. 12). Whereas the knowledge of the Word as made known in creation neither saves nor has the purpose of saving, grace—the one and only grace—came by Jesus Christ, the Word incarnate, knowledge of whom we have in the gospel by faith, not in creation by mere rationality (vv. 15ff.).
The basic thought of the opening verses of John 1 is that there is grace only in the gospel, received by faith, unto salvation. The theory of common grace contradicts this basic message by positing a grace of God also outside the gospel in nature. And, do not forget, this theory of common grace posits not only a sound, but non-saving, knowledge of God. It also teaches a common grace that sincerely offers all humans outside of Christ salvation: the well-meant offer of salvation. On the reading of the men of common grace, verse 9 is made to read: “… the true Light in nature, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world …*with the grace that makes salvation possible by accepting a well-meant offer to all humans* and the grace *that expresses God’s sincere desire to save all humans*.” Now there is saving grace in nature as well as in the gospel. Does not even the least acute Christian see at once that this flies in the face of the main message of the passage?
Calvin comments on the passage: “all their [those
who have only a knowledge of God by natural reason from creation alone]
understanding is nothing else than mere vanity.
Hence it follows that there is no hope of the salvation of men, unless
God grant new aid; for though the Son of God sheds his *light* upon
them, they are so dull that they *do not comprehend* whence that *light*
proceeds, but are carried sway by foolish and wicked imaginations to absolute
madness…’” (DJE, 07/04/2022)
------------------------------------------------
(II)
Herman
Hoeksema & Henry Danhof
[Source: Sin and Grace (Grand Rapids, MI: RFPA, 2003), p. 249]
[According] to the doctrine of common grace, [it is
by a power of grace] that sin is restrained and that the natural man
is thereby qualified to live a somewhat good life in creation before the face
of God … [Common] grace is denied in the prologue of the gospel of John. The
light did shine, but the darkness was not improved by it and
did not grasp the light [John 1:5].
------------------------------------------------
(III)
Prof. Herman C. Hanko
[Source: Covenant Reformed News, vol. 4, nos. 21-22]
In order to understand this [text], we must distinguish between what our Reformed confessions call “natural light” and “spiritual light.”
The natural light with which men were endowed at the moment of their creation included their rationality and morality. They were created as rational and moral creatures, able to know God and good and evil.
Spiritual light, on the other hand, is composed of those spiritual virtues which are the image of God in man: the true knowledge of God, righteousness, and holiness.
When man fell, two things happened: he lost all the spiritual light with which he had been endowed at creation and the natural light was so severely diminished that he continued to possess only a few tattered remains.
Or, to put it a little differently, although man became totally depraved, he remained a man who was rational and moral. He did not become an animal; he did not suffer a change in the kind of creature he was; he was still a man, now totally depraved, but responsible as a rational and moral creature before God for his sin.
This is the light of which John 1 speaks. Our readers will notice that John 1 has other things to say about this light. In verse 5 we read: “And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” And in verse 10: “He was in the world, and the world was made by him and the world knew him not.”
The same truth is taught in another way in Romans 1:18ff. Here Paul is speaking of the wrath of God which is revealed from heaven against all the ungodly who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.
But you understand that if they suppress the truth, they must know the truth in a certain sense. And they do because they remain rational and moral creatures. They remain men and do not become animals.
How do they know the truth? God makes it known to them in creation: “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them” (v. 19).
How has God showed it to them? “For the invisible things of them from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead” (v. 20). If they did not have natural light, they could not see God in creation.
Why does God make these things known to them? “So that they may be without excuse” (v. 20).
What do they do with their natural light? “When they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image …” (vv. 21-25)
So the light spoken of in John 1:9 is the so-called “natural light” in distinction from spiritual light.
Our Reformed confessions also speak of this natural light.
The Belgic Confession, in speaking of the effects of sin, says: “Being thus become wicked, perverse, and corrupt in all his ways, he hath lost all his excellent gifts, which he had received from God, and only retained a few remains thereof, which, however, are sufficient to leave man without excuse” (Art. 14). Does this mean man can do good? Not at all. The article goes on to say: “For all the light which is in us is changed into darkness, as the Scriptures teach us, saying: The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not: where St. John calleth men darkness.”
The Canons of Dordt teach us: “There remain, however, in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God, of natural things, and of the differences between good and evil, and discovers some regard for virtue, good order in society, and for maintaining an orderly external deportment.”
Does this mean man can do good? Not at all. The article goes on to say: “But so far is this light of nature from being sufficient to bring him to a saving knowledge of God, and to true conversion, that he is incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil. Nay further, this light, such as it is, man in various ways renders wholly polluted, and holds it in unrighteousness, by doing which he becomes inexcusable before God” (Canons III&IV, 4).
Some have said that it is evidence of God’s common grace that man remains a rational and moral being. If it were not because of common grace, man would, so it is said, have become an animal or a devil. And it is added to this that because man did not, through common grace, become an animal or a devil, man is capable of doing good in some measure, though perhaps not saving good.
But this is absurd.
In the first place, where in all the Bible does Scripture tell us that man would have become an animal or a devil apart from common grace? It isn’t there—anywhere. This is mere human conjecture.
In the second place, from a certain point of view it would have been better for man to become an animal. After all, animals do not go to hell. Men do. It can hardly be called “grace,” then, that man did not become an animal.
In the third place, the terrible part of the fall is that man remained a man, still able to think and will. And because he is still a man, he is able to curse God, deny His name, fight against Him, and use the whole creation in an effort to destroy His cause. He is totally depraved as a man, not as an animal.
But finally, he can be and is saved as a man,
because Christ became a man like us in all things except our sin. And when,
though Christ, we are saved by faith in Him, we are given a salvation which not
only restores all we lost in Adam, but which lifts us up higher than Adam could
ever have gone, for we are taken into heaven itself, there to live with God
forever.
------------------------------------------------
(IV)
More to come! (DV)
No comments:
Post a Comment