A.A. van Ruler's idea of the 'messianic intermezzo' and its implications for understanding the Old Testament

A.A. van Ruler's doctrine of the 'messianic intermezzo' and its implications for understanding the Old Testament. Garth Hodnett CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 CHAPTER ONE THE MESSIANIC INTERMEZZO The Motive of the Incarnation . . . The Person and Work of Christ . . . Jesus the Christ . . . . . Jesus and the kingdom . . . . The kingdom is present but also future . . The present kingdom . . . . . The kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of God The Messianic Intermezzo . . . . The Crucified God and the Messianic Intermezzo Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 12 16 21 23 24 25 26 28 37 CHAPTER TWO HISTORY AND ESCHATOLOGY The kingdom of God . . . . . Some different understandings of the kingdom of God Van Ruler's understanding of the kingdom . . The transcendence of the kingdom . . . The immanence of the kingdom . . . The kingdom of God and history . . . The meaning of history . . . . Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God . . . Infralapsarianism versus supralapsarianism . . The original and final purpose of creation . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 41 42 44 . . . . 45 . 46 47 . 52 . 73 60 60 66 . CHAPTER THREE SALVATION AND GLORIFICATION The Resurrection and the Ascension . . . . Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit . . . . The Holy Spirit and the kingdom of Christ . . 91 The appropriation of salvation by man . . . The fragmentary synthesis of redemption and creation 97 Church and state . . . . . . Kingdom and covenant . . . . . The goal of history . . . . . . Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father . 111 Christians in order to be men . . . . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . 78 78 84 94 . . . 100 104 107 115 . 117 CHAPTER FOUR THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE ISRAELITIC TORAH AND CHRISTIAN HISTORY . The Old Testament and the Torah . . . . 123 The Law of God . . . . . . . The fulfilment of the Old Testament . . . 137 The importance of the Old Testament . . . 150 . 122 . 124 Notes . . . . . . 162 CONCLUSION . . . . The Trinity . . . . Predestination and God's Eternal Decree The Kingdom and the Law . . Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 . . . 170 178 191 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 194 Introduction This study is intended as a brief introduction to and discussion of an important aspect of A.A. Van Ruler's theology. It is not intended as a discussion of the whole of his theology or as an overview or summary of his theology. It is specifically aimed at his doctrine of the messianic intermezzo and how the Old Testament is to be understood within this context. Van Ruler's doctrine of the messianic intermezzo, states that the eternal Son of God took on human nature in the incarnation as a reaction to human sin and that this human nature will be laid aside in the eschaton when sin, death and guilt have been destroyed. This doctrine is not an offshoot from or an incidental part of his theology. It is one of the most important foundation stones of his theology. i Thus it underlies and directs much of his thought. However he does not discuss this doctrine as such and nowhere does he give a straightforward elaboration of it. The doctrine of the messianic intermezzo is not only important for the sake of understanding the theology of this one particular theologian. Its affirmation or denial effects the place given to Christ and Christology in theology. The question whether Christ makes himself superfluous when the kingdom of God comes may sound speculative but fundamental decisions of supreme importance depend on it. "Any eschatologically orientated and functionally developed Christology comes 'at the end' to the question whether its mediator has not made himself superfluous. Its conceptions of the mediation and representative function of Christ are determined by what is decided in this 'last' question".ii Christ's place and rule must be clarified in theology. The ecclesia triumphans must be distinguished from the kingdom of glory, the fulfilment from the consummation, the expression that Christ fulfils all in all (Eph 1:23) from the expression that God will be all in 1 all (1 Cor 15:28). The regnum Christi (messianic intermezzo) must be distinguished from the regnum Dei (kingdom of glory). "Naar mijn inzicht staat of valt met deze dispositie niet minder dan de hele theologische kijk op de geschiedenis, de kerk, de cultuur en den staat, in een woord: op de gansche, individueele en gemeenschappelijke, existentie."iii Thus it can be seen that the theologoumenon of the messianic intermezzo is not only important within A.A. van Ruler's theology but has significant implications for all christian theology. This study is not only concerned with the idea of the messianic intermezzo but also with the place of the Old Testament within this idea. However 'the place of the Old Testament within this idea' is not an optional extra that can be added or left out when discussing the doctrine of the messianic intermezzo. The Old Testament is, or at least contains God's law, the Torah. The Torah according to Van Ruler is not to be understood as a system of immutable laws to be lived up to but as the gracious and dynamic presence of God amongst His people. Christ as the concentrated essence of the nation Israel, was appointed as an emergency measure to fulfil the law because the nation Israel had failed in its divinely appointed task of doing this. Christ fulfilled the Old Testament because he placed himself absolutely under its Spirit and this fulfilment means that it is put into effect in him.iv This means that the Torah returns, not to the letter but in spirit and in truth as the material content of salvation in Christ. This does justice to the fact that the Old Testament is canonicalv and prevents the salvation in Christ from being understood gnostically.vi Outline The first chapter entitled : The Messianic Intermezzo will discuss Christ as God's gracious emergency measure for the sake of sin. This will entail a discussion of Christ's motive for 2 incarnation. Once it has been demonstrated that this motive was purely because sin entered the world the way is cleared to show that christology is soteriology and is completely functional and eschatological. Christ's work as expiatio, satisfactio and placatio, so that created reality can once again stand before God's countenance, will also be discussed. This concept of recreatio will be contrasted with Moltmann's idea of a nova creatio and his criticisms of Van Ruler's theology will be looked at. The second chapter : History and Eschatology will assess the idea that the meaning of history is the ascension of God to his throne in the establishment of the eschatological kingdom of Glory. Thus the idea that God's original and ultimate intention is the naked existence of things before His countenance will be investigated and the place of sin and the gracious response to sin (Christ) in the eternal decree will be clarified. The third chapter : Salvation and Glorification will look at the regnum Christi and what it means to say that Christ rules. In this context the Holy Spirit will come into consideration and the essential character of salvation in Christ and through the Spirit will be discussed. This salvation (the regnum Christi) will be distinguished from glorification (the regnum Dei). The fourth chapter : The relationship of the Israelitic Torah and Christian History will look at the meaning of the Torah as God's gracious presence in the flesh, as the gift of salvation and not as a formal 'something' to be lived up to in order to earn salvation. Following this we will discuss Van Ruler's idea that the Torah is the material content of salvation in Christ and that a christianized culture is an incidental repetition, mutatis mutandis, of the theocratic situation found in Israel in the Old Testament. The above mentioned chapters contain in essence everything this study wants to say about Van Ruler's thought on this topic. However, as his ideas are so often misunderstood and his 3 theology is misrepresented by many of his critics, this study will conclude with a discussion of some of the more common criticisms that have been levelled against his theology. In the concluding chapter we will also take a look at the importance of his ideas for modern day theology. The primary intention of this study is to clearly present A.A. van Ruler's ideas on this topic and indicate their importance and far reaching consequences for theological thought. The secondary intention of this study is to show that the doctrine of the messianic intermezzo is not strange to reformed theology. Van Ruler may be the only theologian who has used the phrase 'messianic intermezzo' but this does not mean that the idea is unique to him. Indeed the idea can be traced directly to Calvin and is deeply rooted in the Bible itself. This study aims to demonstrate that this idea is implied not only in the works of other reformed theologians but also in the confessions of the reformed church. 4 Notes for Introduction i. B. Engelbrecht, Die Gekruisigde God en die Messiaanse Intermezzo in Ned.Geref. Teologiese Tydskrif Part 17 No. 3 June 1976 Pg 130. ii. J.Moltmann The Crucified God SCM Press, London, 1992 Pg257. iii. A.A. van Ruler De Vervulling Van De Wet Callenbach Nijkerk 1947 Pg 51. iv. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Eerdmans Michigan 1971 Pg 73. v. Most other views degrade the significance of the Old Testament by understanding it as the Old Covenant which has been abolished in Christ, or by reading it typologically and thus imposing the message of the New Testament onto it and not allowing it to speak for itself. vi. If salvation is not understood israelitically it is understood gnostically (A.A. van Ruler). 5 Chapter 1 In this chapter we will look at the idea that the incarnation of Jesus Christ is an emergency measure in reaction to sin. First we will look at the motive for the incarnation of Christ to see whether there could be any reason for Christ's incarnation, other than sin. Once we have demonstrated that the incarnation is nothing more (or less) than God's gracious reaction to sin we will examine the person and work of Jesus Christ and provide support for A.A. van Ruler's view that these are inseparable and are to be understood functionally. In the following section of this chapter we will look at this function performed by Christ understood as expiatio, placatio and satisfactio. The consequences of this anselmian (and reformed) understanding of Christ's work as the saving of this reality will be contrasted with Moltmann's idea of a nova creatio. The Messianic Intermezzo. The locus classicus in Scripture on which the doctrine/theologoumenon of the Messianic Intermezzo is based, is I Cor. 15:24-28. "Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 'For God has put all things in subjection under his feet.' But when it says, 'all things are put in subjection under him,' it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to everyone." 7 These statements imply that the work of the Christ is in its totality an 'intermezzo' in the historical succession of God's acts of salvation. The incarnation of Christ (that is, of the eternal Son of God in the Son born of Mary) was/is not an end in itself. By its very nature it was/is a means to an end. God is not first and foremost concerned with the Christ, but with the world and its recreation unto the kingdom of God. The world as such is to be redeemed in order to exist eternally before God. To this end God does not 'transsubstantiate' the world into something other than world. His protological and eschatological intention is that the world should be saved, that is, cleansed from sin, guilt and death. Therefore God's ultimate intention is not to 'Christify' this world, but to cleanse it from sin and death. In an eschatological perspective it should be said that God did not create the world for the sake of Christ, but for its own sake. All his historical acts of salvation point toward this end, namely, the eschatological purification of this world. The incarnation of the eternal Son was the decisive means to this end. The motive of the Incarnation. A.A. van Ruler clearly understands the incarnation of Christ to be God's reaction to mankinds sin,i but in order to see the significance of this idea and the traditionalii understanding of this, we will discuss the question: does the incarnation originate in and is it motivated by the lost condition of mankind, or would it also have occurred if there had not been a fall of mankind? This idea of 'an incarnation even without the fall' is speculative iii but it deserves a closer examination because it has often been answered in the affirmative and "by answering this question we approach a far reaching conclusion regarding the work of Christ."iv 8 Those who answer the question 'incarnation even without the fall?' in the affirmative say that the miracle of the incarnation simply cannot be a mere response to a human act (the fall) and even though the incarnation is historically connected with deliverance this is not it's primary motive.v Thus it is impossible to avoid a dualistic motivation: the secondary motive being the historical reality of the fall and the primary for a hypothetical situation which would also have called for the incarnation. Of course even without sin man would have had to be lifted up to higher perfection and the church has recognised this with its theologoumenon of the covenant of works. The covenant of works is "God's pact with Adam in his integrity, as the head of the whole human race, by which God requiring of man the perfect obedience of the law of works promised him, if obedient, eternal life in heaven, but threatened him, if he transgressed, with eternal death; and on his part man promised perfect obedience to God's requirement."vi But nowhere does the covenant of works indicate the necessity of the incarnation of Christ, indeed this would be impossible because within this covenant Adam is seen as the head of the human race, not Christ. Thus the primary motive for Christ's incarnation is not usually sought in the idea that man must become more perfect as a creaturely being but rather that man must be deified. This was especially the case in the nineteenth century, during which the speculative philosophy of Hegel strongly dominated theology. This philosophy strongly emphasised the idea of God's becoming man, and the incarnation was explained as the gradual unification of God and man by a process of evolution.vii The idea of 'incarnation even without the fall' is opposed to the exclusive soteriological motive of the incarnation. The question now is: what does the Bible say about the incarnation of Christ? In Scripture we learn Christ came to give his life, a ransom for many (Matt 20:28; 9 cf. John 12:27); to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8; cf. Gal 4:4, Rom 8:3). He came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15, cf. Matt 1:21), to seek that which was lost (Luke 19:10),to call sinners to repentance (Mark 2:17). No doubt these quotations could be multiplied, but the point is that the coming of Christ is always connected with our salvation. Nowhere is mentioned a 'meaning' of his coming as such, nor an 'idea' of the incarnation apart from this salvation; there is no mention of an Immanuel apart from Isaiah's prophecy of salvation, nor of an event by itself which would justify the speculative argument: 'incarnation even without the fall.'viii The Bible is obviously not afraid to depict God's act as a holy acting in reaction, viz., against mankinds guilt and his/her lost condition.ix The creeds of the church also make it clear that the church has always accepted this exclusive soteriological connection between the fall of man and the incarnation of Christ. The Nicene creed states that Christ descended for our sake and for our salvation. The Athanasian creed talks of the incarnation of The Son being necessary for our everlasting salvation. The Belgic Confession mentions that Christ took on a human soul and a human body in order to save both (article xviii). In The Heidelberg Catechism, Lord's day xi, xii and xiii link Christ's incarnation with our salvation. Article 2 of the Canons of Dordt also connect the incarnation of the Son with our salvation. A. Kuyper has pointed out that this idea of 'incarnation even without a fall' has always been considered heretical in the history of the Church and the Church has refused to accept the idea that this view would result in a deeper insight into the mystery of the incarnation.x "But since all Scripture proclaims that to become our Redeemer he was clothed with flesh, it is too presumptuous to imagine another reason or another end. We well know why Christ was promised from the beginning: to restore the fallen world and to succour lost men."xi From the above it can be seen that the question of 'incarnation even without the fall' is empty speculation which obscures rather than clarifies the dogmatic 10 perspectives in Christology. Dogmatically we are thus standing on firm ground when we say that the incarnation of Christ is a reaction to sin and is exclusively soteriological. With his characteristic sharpness and eye for distinctions, Van Ruler points out that the incarnation is not concerned only with sin, with its guilt or with its power and thus with reconciliation, forgiveness and purification. The incarnation is also a reaction to death. Our salvation in Christ includes eternal life. But this is still not enough, the incarnation is also a reaction to the devil and the demons that rule the human race. Expressed in more modern terms: the incarnation is a reaction to paganism.xii Of course all of these: sin, death and paganism are realities brought into being by the fall of man, and thus they are realities upheld by man himself. It is from these realities that we need to be saved. Christ is the reaction to these realities. " Het eigenlijke kwaad steekt alleen maar in de mens, in zijn wil, is zijn schuld, bestaat in zijn zondaar zijn. En daarop is de incarnatie de reactie."xiii The Person and Work of Christ. We have seen that Christ's incarnation is a reaction to sin. We will now connect this with the idea of the inseparability of the person and work of Christ. Melanchthon states: "To acknowledge Christ is to acknowledge his benefits, not, as is sometimes taught, to behold his natures or the modes of his Incarnation." xiv Some theologians, especially in the nineteenth century used this statement to support their anti-ontological value-judgement theology that it is not the two natures of Christ or the being 11 of his person that is of central interest but rather his benefits for us.xv However this use of Melanchthon's statement to separate the person and work of Christ is illegitimate because in the same context he refers to scholastic theology with its vain use of words and concepts which obscure the gospel. One could say that Melanchthon defends the existential character of the knowledge of faith and declares it to be knowledge of the salvation granted us in Christ.xvi The fruit of Christ's work is not an impersonal blessedness that can be abstracted from his person. "Therefore, that joining together of Head and members, that indwelling of Christ in our hearts - in short, that mystical union - are accorded by us the highest degree of importance, so that Christ, having been made ours, makes us sharers with him in the gifts with which he has been endowed. We do not, therefore, contemplate him outside ourselves from afar in order that his righteousness may be imputed to us but because we put on Christ and are engrafted into his body - in short, because he deigns to make us one with him."xvii The fact that Christ's benefits cannot be abstracted from his person is confirmed by Scripture: "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ" (1 Cor. 6:15; cf. question 32 of the Heidelberg Catechism). It is impossible to separate Christ's person from his work, as he manifests himself in his work as the Mediator between God and man (II Tim 2:5). From the above it should be clear what Van Ruler means when he writes, "Christ's offices are more important to us than his natures and states," especially in connection with the inseparable relationship between Christ's person and work, which he points out immediately afterwards.xviii Van Ruler does not hesitate to talk about the person and natures of Christ: "In christology the doctrine of the unio personalis sive hypostatica is decisive. It expresses that in the Logos the divine and human nature, the being of God and the being of man are united. It also contains the idea that the human nature that was taken on by the Logos, the natura 12 humana assumpta, is not an own hypostasis, not an own I, not an own person but rather finds its hypostasis in the Logos himself. There was never a 'Mister Jesus', but always only God-the-Son-in-human-flesh. In my opinion this is the indispensable kernel of the mystery of the incarnation - however fragmented these formulas of dogma must be."xix However this is not idle speculation regarding the person of Christ, it is intimately related to Christ's work. Christ's work of salvation is only meaningful if the above description is true (cf. Belgic confession articles 19 and 20, Heidelberg Catechism Lords day 5 and 6, Canons of Dort, second head of doctrine, articles 1 to 4, Athanasian Creed sentences 29 to 38). Similarly when Van Ruler says that Christ's offices are more important to us than his natures he is not separating Christ's work from his person because "the moment one deals with the offices of Christ he is consulting the light which God's revelation casts over his person, over Christ himself in the administration of his offices."xx Therefore Bavinck could say that Christ does not just perform prophetic, priestly and kingly activities, his whole person is prophet, priest and king, and that everything he is and does reveals this threefold dignity.xxi Thus it is clear that we cannot, and Van Ruler does not, differentiate between Christ's person and his work. In the first section (on the motive for the incarnation) we saw that Christ's incarnation was motivated entirely by sin and thus has an exclusively soteriological motive - namely to save us from guilt, death and paganism. Christ came to save us! Christ came to do the work of saving us. Christ's person is our salvation. This means all christology is soteriology. Thus " the office of Jesus Christ is that function of the Mediator Jesus Christ, which he voluntarily undertook himself according to the Father's will and the Holy Spirit's unction, in order to reconcile to God and to save the sinful men given to him; which function he alone does accomplish according to both natures." xxii Christ accomplishes the function of saving us. 13 Christology is functional and Christ answers the problem of our sin and guilt. Thus Tillich states: "Christology is a function of soteriology. The problem of soteriology creates the christological question and gives direction to the christological answer. For it is the Christ who brings the New Being, who saves men from the old being, that is, from existential estrangement and its self-destructive consequences."xxiii As the incarnation was motivated exclusively by sin and because Christ's person cannot be separated from his work, everything that is said about Christ (his person and work) must refer directly to the function he came to fulfil, namely, salvation. All else that is said about Christ is idle speculation. We have seen the impossibility of separating the person and work of Christ and the fact that Christ came to perform a function. We have also seen that, following the reformed tradition, this is exactly what Van Ruler states. Thus it seems strange to hear P. van Hoof state: " It is clear that Van Ruler presents Christ more by what he does than by what his person is. The unfruitful distinction between the work and the person of Christ, that has controlled theology up to the present, is also a characteristic of Van Ruler's theology...Christ's work is primarily spoken about...thus one could say that Van Ruler's christology is purely functional." xxiv It seems to me that Van Hoof is confusing functional christology with an abstraction of Christ's work from his person, but it should be clear from the above that this is not so and in this case Van Hoof's judgement is incorrect. Of course he is correct when he says Van Ruler's christology is functional but this does not mean that Van Ruler separates Christ's work from his person. Functional christology asserts that in his person and work Christ is our saviour and everything that is said about Christ that does not refer to our salvation in him is useless speculation. It should also be remembered that functional christology distinguishes between the Eternal Son of God as the second person of the Trinity and the Christ - the Eternal Son of 14 God emptied himself and took on human flesh in order to perform the function of saving the world from sin and when this work has been performed the Son will return to his eternal place in the trinity. Jesus the Christ. We are saved by the person and work of Christ. But how are we to understand this salvation? Does salvation come in place of this fallen, sinful reality,so that this reality is rejected and there is a nova creatio? Is salvation added to this reality so that transubstantiation and elevation of this reality takes place? Or must salvation be understood in terms of reconciliatio, the taking away of guilt from all creation, so that it can once again stand before God? In this section we will look at Van Rulers understanding of salvation as reconciliation (in terms of expiatio, satisfactio and placatio). Van Ruler follows Calvin and the reformed confessions in beginning from "the idea of representation, understood in Anselm's terms."xxv According to Anselm every rational creature should submit himself entirely to the will of God. That is the honour that God demands. He who pays it is righteous and he who does not pay it, sins. Sin is nothing other than dishonouring God by withholding from Him his own.xxvi This sin cannot merely be remitted because the non-punishment of sin unatoned for would bring disorder into the kingdom of God, "but it is not proper that God should overlook anything disorderly in his kingdom...It is therefore necessary, either that the honour withheld be rendered, or that punishment follow." xxvii Therefore it is necessary that satisfaction or punishment follow every sin. In His mercy God has chosen the way of satisfaction. However 15 satisfaction is subject to the rule: "It does not suffice merely to restore that which was withheld; but, for the contumely inflicted, he ought to restore more than he withheld."xxviii But even the smallest disobedience entails an infinite guilt, because the guilt is to be measured by the God who is despised.xxix Therefore a satisfaction must be rendered to God which is more than all things outside of God. By his very nature it is impossible for man to fulfil this satisfaction. Only God is able to give satisfaction to himself. However because man is the sinner, it is man, not God who must give the satisfaction. Therefore someone who is both God and man must do it. This is the God-man Jesus Christ. The God-man is already under the obligation to render obedience to God so he could only provide satisfaction through his sufferings, as he did not have to suffer; he was innocent. Although our sin is infinite Christ's sacrificial work is also infinite - since this work is done by God himself. In this work Christ merits a reward from God. Since He cannot give anything to the Son, who needs nothing, the reward accrues to the advantage of those for whom the Son died. Thus the sins of mankind are remitted and in this way the divine justice as well as the divine mercy is preserved . For our purposes the important moments of Anselm's doctrine are that, firstly, Christ is our substitute and innocently takes the punishment that we deserve. Secondly, that by this substitution our sins and guilt are expiated, we are no longer held responsible, we are forgiven. Thirdly, that God's righteous wrath against sin has been placated by this substitution. Fourthly, that this is a transaction that takes place between God and Christ although Christ performed God's work of reconciliation here on earth. "Het werk Gods geschiedt in het aangenomen vleesch. En dat werk Gods is dan primair en centraal de arbeid Gods met de zonde, met name met de schuld der zonde; verzoening is niet allereerst reconciliatio, maar satisfactio en expiatio. En dit werk Gods geschiedt niet zozeer voor onze 16 oogen, maar veelmeer voor Gods oogen; niet wij leeren er iets uit kennen, ontdekken of zien, maar God wordt er door verzoend (verzoening als placatio)."xxx "The church has never dogmatized Anselm's theory. It has wisely restricted itself from doing so, because there is no absolute theory of the atonement. Abelard and Origen as well as others have had different theories of the atonement. The church has never decided, but it is obvious that it liked Anselm's most, probably because it has the deepest psychological roots."xxxi Anselm's central idea of substitution is also well supported in Scripture, for instance, in the following passages. Mt. 26:28 (this is my blood of the covenant which is shed for many into remission of sins), Rom 5:8 (God commandeth his own love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us); 2 Cor 5:15, 21 (he died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again him who knew no sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him); Gal 3:13 (Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us); 1 Tim 2:6 (who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony to be borne in it's own time); Heb. 2:9 (...Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honour, that by the grace of God he should taste death for every man); Jn. 10:11,15 (I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep; ...I lay down my life for the sheep). This list could continue. xxxii Anselm's idea of substitution is clearly reflected in the Reformed Creeds. The Belgic Confession, Article 20 states: "We believe that God, who is perfectly merciful and just, sent his Son to assume that nature in which the disobedience was committed, to make satisfaction in the same, and to bear the punishment of sin by His most bitter passion and death. God therefore manifested His Justice against His Son when he laid our iniquities upon Him, and poured forth His mercy and Goodness on us, who were guilty and worthy of damnation, out 17 of mere and perfect love, giving His Son unto death for us, and raising Him for our justification, that through Him we might obtain immortality and life eternal (cf. article 21). In the Heidelberg Catechism the answer to question 17 (why must He withal be true God?) is: That by the power of His Godhead He might bear in His human nature the burden of God's wrath; and that He might obtain for us, and restore to us, righteousness and life. (cf questions 12 to 16). The Canons of Dordrecht, Second head of Doctrine Article 2 states: ...He has been pleased of His infinite mercy to give His only begotten Son for our surety, who was made sin, and became a curse for us and in our stead, that He might make satisfaction to divine justice on our behalf (cf. articles 1, 3 and 4). Thus it can be seen that the idea of substitution is of central importance. Van Ruler states: "The idea of substitution is of determining significance over the whole line of christology. The messiah does and is everything that he does and is in our place and for our benefit. He is even messiah in our place. That is to say: his whole being is a being in our place. The mediatorship is substitution."xxxiii Everything that can be said about Christ refers directly to this substitution in our place. Christ's vicarious satisfaction is the expiation of our guilt and the plaction of the righteous wrath of God. Christ took on our human nature in order to save us. He did not go through Mary with a human nature that was newly created in heaven. "Biblically it seems as if everything can be said from the ex Maria. If one holds fast to this, then redemption joins onto creation...Created reality in its totality is the subject of, and in this sense is surrounded by, redemption."xxxiv Thus it can be seen that the reformed doctrine of reconciliation (and Van Ruler's understanding of it) refers to the removal of guilt from this creation, not an infusion of a new 18 substance into this creation or the abandonment of this creation in favour of a nova creatio. Jesus and the Kingdom. John the Baptist appeared in Israel with the message: " Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt 4:17, cf. 3:2) John, Jesus and the Apostles use this idiom of the kingdom to express the message of salvation to contempary Judaism, on the one hand because apparently it was a well known expression in the late jewish apocalyptic writings and thus a known concept and, on the other hand because the ideas they wished to express thereby were deeply anchored in the Old Testament revelation of God and expectation of faith.xxxv Although the expression 'the kingdom of heaven' or 'the kingdom of God' does not appear at all in the Old Testament the idea that is expressed by it certainly does. "What Israel lived and experienced in its history as the nation of the special revelation, was already a form of the kingdom of God realized in the theocratic life around the law and under the rule of God, while the earthly, national king was his anointed; and at the same time it was expectation for the future, because the underlying principle of the confession that God is king in the present, was the expectation that he would be king in the future in an intensified and eschatological sense."xxxvi Jesus states: "The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye and believe the gospel" (Mk 1:15). The opening words 'the time is fulfilled' speak of something that has found its completion, its final stage in the present. This fulfilment refers to the Old Testament expectation. In Christ the kingdom of God has come. The nature of this kingdom is indicated by Jesus when He states: "If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you" (Matt. 12:28, Luke 11:20), and "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from 19 heaven" (Luke 10:18). This indicates Christ's victory over the demons. The nature of the kingdom is also expressed by the fact that Jesus' preaching of the kingdom and his miracles are repeatedly mentioned in the same breath (eg. Matt. 4:23; 9:35) Christ's healing of the sick and bringing to life of the dead (as well as his own resurrection) express his victory over death. Finally the essence of this kingdom is referred to as the preaching of the gospel - "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the Good News of the kingdom of God is preached" (Luke 16:16). The good news that is preached is the forgiveness of sins. The kingdom of God is salvation from sin, death and the demons. The kingdom of God is salvation in Christ.xxxvii The kingdom is present but also future. The central proclamation of the New Testament is that the kingdom has already come in Jesus, and this kingdom is a full reality in the present. But it is concealed with Christ in Heaven, in God (fl. Col. 3:3; 1 Peter 1:4), which at the same time means safely put away and withdrawn from publicity. The concealment of salvation in the present does not diminish its reality or fullness, but rather emphasises its particularity. However real the presence of the kingdom of God on earth may be, it is present as kingdom of Christ, not in the majesty and glory and generality of the kingdom of glory, but in the concealment of the flesh and the concealment of heaven, merciful and graceful in the particularness of His special revelation. xxxviii Thus the present is to be understood as the kingdom of God which has dawned upon us in all its fullness as the kingdom of Christ. The kingdom of God is present but it is also an eschatological figure and thus a matter of the future. The eschatological perspective must be upheld.xxxix It lies in the nature of the kingdom 20 of God as the kingdom of Christ that it can be denied and rejected because it lies in the essence of the supremacy of Christ to reign in the midst of his enemies (Psalm 110; 1 Cor. 15). And the supremacy of Christ will never be other than a supremacy in medio inimicorum.xl But the fact that it is the kingdom of God implies a hidden supremacy over all resistance,xli and because the kingdom of God is essentially eschatological the promise and the expectation holds that what is now concealed will once for all be revealed and unveiled. Christ will give the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24). This will be a new act of God in history. The Present Kingdom. In his fulfilment of the Old Testament Jesus Christ has set op the kingdom once and for all. The kingdom is now fully real but it bears a completely christological and not an eschatological character. All of God's rule in the present is Christ's rule. In the present the kingdom of God must be understood christologically. And all christology centres on the messiahship of Jesus. The messiahship is also the fulfilment of the Old Testament.xlii The kingdom of God as kingdom of Christ is to be understood from the messiahship, from the saving work of Christ. We are saved because of what Christ has done. But we cannot separate the person and the work of Christ. In his person the salvation of God is a reality in the present. He himself is the kingdom of God in the present. This is to be understood in a cosmic sense because all reality is saved by his work (in his person). The kingdom of God is salvation in Christ. 21 The kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of God. In the New Testament witness it is impossible to keep the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Christ separate. These two concepts are so interlinked in the New Testament, that it could even be said that they are identical. Therefore the words 'messianic' and eschatological must be seen together. xliii In the messianic kingdom of Christ we have the full eschatological salvation. We have already seen that it is of the essence of this kingdom that this salvation is concealed. Christ's fulfilment of the Old Testament means that all God's promises are 'yea and amen' in him.xliv Nevertheless, even in the New Testament the christian life is dominated by promise and expectation.xlv We have not yet entered into the eschatological reality itself, we have not come out of the promise into the promised reality, out of the expectation to the life itself. Thus there is a difference between the regnum Christi and the regnum Dei. This difference is "not described by the category of fulfilment (pleroma) but by the category of revelation (apocalypsis)."xlvi The difference is thus a difference in modality. It is one and the same kingdom in its concealment and in its revelation. The concealment in the flesh, the humanity of God in Christ, will be undone in the eschatological act of revelation. Then the 'Son' - that is the Son as he appeared in the flesh will give the kingdom to the Father. This does not mean that he will lay aside the glory, but that in a certain sense he will return to his glorious divinity.xlvii In other words the incarnation falls away in the eschaton and then nothing remains except the triune God and the things in their naked (redeemed) existence.xlviii 22 The Messianic Intermezzo. The incarnation of the Son of God was motivated exclusively by mankind's sin. xlix Redemption in Jesus Christ is to be understood in terms of satisfactio, expiatio and placatio. The guilt of sinful existence is reconciled. No new substance is added to creation and we are not redeemed from creation because creation is good.l It is creation itself, in its totality that is saved. "The redemptive work in Jesus Christ only happened in order that creation could again exist before the countenance of God."li The world has been redeemed and on the basis of Christ's merit we are pronounced just. But we have seen that this salvation is concealed and that is why the time of salvation is also the time of missionary work. In order to experience this world as the kingdom of Christ in the present, people must know that they are saved, that they are forgiven. Christ not only rules in the midst of his enemies, he rules for the sake of his enemies. However the New Testament and the Creeds of the Church do not only talk of our present salvation but of a future kingdom of glory where there is no sin. At present Christ is our mediator, our substitute and he fills, spirituali modo, all in all (Eph. 1:23) but at the end he will give the kingdom to the Father so that God may be all in all (1 Cor. 15:24,28). Then there will be direct communion with the triune God, and we will no longer need a mediator, a substitute. But Christ is understood purely in terms of his substitution for us and as mediator between us and God because of this substitution. Therefore Christ will be superfluous in the eschaton. Thus "he ceases to be Messiah; he only causes things to be saved in order that in the joy of their existence they may praise God and the Lamb."lii However three things must be remembered: firstly Jesus Christ is a means to an end, the end is more important than the means, but one cannot act as if the incarnation has already fallen away. In order to reach the 23 eschaton we must be incorporated into him.liii Secondly the thesis that Jesus Christ was an emergency measure relates to the incarnate Son rather than the eternal Son. Thus the doctrine of the Trinity is not affected by it, and it has nothing whatever to do with subordinationism.liv Thirdly, creation is respected as creation and God as God. Creation is saved as creation. In the kingdom of God nothing remains except the triune God and all things in their naked (redeemed) existence.lv It is true we must go through the unio mystica cum Christo but this is the means not the end. One could say that the proton returns in the eschaton, but not in the sense of a restitio in integrum - a plus must be acknowledged in the eschaton above the proton.lvi Thus far in this chapter we have looked at the motive for the incarnation, the inseparability of the person and work of Christ and how this is to be understood functionally in Anselm's terms. It has been demonstrated that A.A. van Ruler's understanding of these doctrines corresponds to that of Creeds of the Reformed Church and various notable reformed theologians, for instance, Calvin, Berkouwer, Heppe, Melanchthon, Bavinck and J.H. Heidegger to name a few. This has been done in order to show that Van Ruler bases himself squarely on the tradition accepted by the Reformed Church and to make it clear whether he has remained true to this tradition. Following these accepted doctrines we have given a brief overview of Van Ruler's doctrine of the messianic intermezzo. Before we proceed with a closer look at the various ideas of this doctrine, and in order to give a deeper understanding of this theologoumenon of the messianic intermezzo we will end this chapter by considering some of the objections raised against it by J. Moltmann. 24 The Crucified God and the Messianic Intermezzo. Moltmann states that the mediatorship and vicariousness of Christ as presented by every christology that is eschatologically orientated is determined by the decision that is taken regarding the question whether Christ makes himself redundant when the kingdom of God comes. lvii Van Ruler answers this question positively and thus sees the mediatorship and vicariousness of Christ purely in terms of his substitution for us, of his expiatory sacrifice for us. According to Moltmann however, "its purpose is not to make itself superfluous, but to become the basis for new, redeemed existence, which it owes to the crucified Christ." This new existence "does not mean a restoration of the creation which has been made obsolete by human sin, but the 'creation of the end-time.'" Thus Christ did not die only as that expiatory offering in which the law was restored or the original creation was reconstituted after the fall of man.lviii Thus Moltmann presents us with a theology in which the crucified Christ is the basis of a new creation. This new creation is understood in terms of a nova creatio that ontologically replaces the old creation. This present world is not saved, we are saved from this world. This theology is radically different to that of Van Ruler. We have seen that in his Christology Van Ruler follows Calvin in accepting the 'radical anselminian understanding of the substitution.' God is in the special form of Christ only in order to bear the guilt of sin and take it away from created reality so that it may once again stand before the countenance of God. The assumptio carnis is only necessary because of sin. It is an emergency measure because God is not concerned with Christ but with creation, with the kingdom of glory, with humanity. Protologically and eschatologically the purpose of God does not lie in the Immanuel, in the God with us, but in humanity, in man before God. In the eschaton the special form of God in Christ will be laid aside. "Protologically and eschatologically, all 25 things will then be directed towards the naked existence of things as such before God, without the veil of sin and without the veil of Christ."lix There is no doubt that Moltmann has correctly understood Van Ruler when he says that, according to Van Ruler, "in the Christ event there is a negation (expiation) of the negative (sin). The positive element is reality itself, which is understood as creation and as kingdom."lx Following his brief, yet correct summary of Van Ruler's doctrine of the messianic intermezzo, Moltmann draws the following conclusions: Firstly, because the suffering Christ is only described functionally the title of Son can only refer to the Godhead of Christ and not the relationship of the whole person of Jesus to the Father. Secondly, if Christ is understood only in terms of the expiation of sin, the aim of his mission is the restoration of the original creation and humanity. Thus nothing new has come into creation and the eschaton is nothing more than a restitutio in integrum. Thirdly, this identification of kingdom and creation leads to an unhistorical conception of God and human reality. Fourthly, if the mission of Christ is only to remove the guilt of sin, the possibility of sin is not necessarily removed. If redeemed existence does not contain some boundless 'more' than created existence, the speculative question of when the next fall would take place must be asked. Fifthly, as the kingdom is identified with creation it must be said that God was 'all in all' in the original creation. In the sixth place, Van Ruler's functional christology means that Christ only intervenes for the future consummation and thus there is no actualization or fulfilment of the kingdom of God in the present. In the seventh place, a merely functional christology must end in a non-christian eschatology of being, obtained from somewhere else. Thus Van Ruler's christology is modalistic and must ultimately end in an un-christian monotheism or pantheism.lxi 26 These are certainly serious objections and if correct would have severe consequences for the whole of Van Ruler's theology. We will now discuss these objections one by one to see whether they do indeed apply to Van Ruler's theology. In his first objection Moltmann states, "Only the functional titles like Kyrios, Christ and sacrifice denote the person of the God-man. In that case the title of Son can only denote the Godhead of Christ and not the relationship of the whole person of Jesus to the Father."lxii This objection is difficult to understand. It seems that Moltmann is accusing Van Ruler of Nestorianism because he distinguishes between the two natures of the incarnated Christ and talks of the pre-existence of the divine nature. Van Ruler certainly makes a careful distinction between the eternal Son of God as the second person of the eternal trinity and the Son of God in human flesh. But the eternal Son of God is not 'exhausted' in the fact that he became flesh. It seems that Moltmann agrees with Bauke that as long as one confesses the 'extra-calvinisticum' and hence refuses to allow the Logos to be enclosed within the finite human nature, then one must remain caught in a dualism.lxiii This, of course, refers to the mystery of the two natures in one person which the Heidelberg Catechism Lords Day 18 expresses. Thus Van Ruler refuses to confuse the two natures of Christ but this does not exclude their union 'without division' and 'without separation.' He states,"In Christology the doctrine of the unio personalis sive hypostatica is decisive. It expresses that in the Logos the divine and human nature, the being of God and the being of man are united. It also contains the idea that the human nature that was taken on by the Logos, the natura humana assumpta, is not an own hypostasis, not an own I, not an own person but rather finds its hypostasis in the Logos himself. There was never a Mister Jesus, but always only God-the-Son-in-human-flesh. In my opinion this is the indispensable kernel of the mystery of the incarnation - however fragmented these formulas of dogma must be."lxiv 27 Van Ruler does justice to the unity and to the distinction without doing violence to the mystery. No one can escape this unity and this distinction if they wish to speak in conformity with Scripture.lxv If the 'extra-Calvinisticum' is denied the Logos would be enclosed within the finite human nature of Christ. Surely this would be a denial of the true divinity of Christ. Thus it would appear that, not only is Moltmann's objection that the distinction between the eternal Son of God and the suffering Christ deprives Jesus of the title 'Son', wrong, but Moltmann's denial of this distinction is also a denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ.lxvi The second objection presented by Moltmann states that if Christ is only understood in terms of expiation for sin, nothing new has come into creation over against the original creation and thus the eschaton is only a restitutio in integrum. This objection is somewhat surprising because Van Ruler expressly denies this. Firstly from the christological point of view there is no place for the idea that in Christ we have received the true humanity, the common humanity, solidarity and thus the original creation. It must always be objected that Christ is more than an ideogram, he is an historical figure. Perhaps he displayed the true humanity, but he did this in our place and above all he displayed this true humanity as God and not purely as man. Finally he not only displayed true humanity but is also centrally concerned with the deepest part of the being of man. "These four elements: the historicity, substitution, divinity and redemption are the constitutive elements in christology, these have made it impossible to stop at the idea that in the eschatological reality, which Christ is, there is only a return of the original creation."lxvii Secondly, from the eschatological point of view it is impossible to say the eschaton is a restitutio in integrum because history is taken up into the eschaton. "History will be returned in the eschaton. On the one hand the eschaton is the purpose of history; if there is no eschaton there is no history. On the other 28 hand history is the content of the eschaton; if there is no history there is no eschaton."lxviii "History is the totality of the ingredients from which the eschaton is made up of."lxix In other words the eschaton is the summarising of history to unity. Everything that is saved in history is saved unto the eschaton. Thus according to Van Ruler the proton does return in the eschaton, but a plus must be acknowledged in the eschaton. This plus is to be understood in terms of the history of sin and grace. Through the experience of the confession of guilt and the proclamation of grace we become 'fire-proof' and go over from the posse non peccare to the non posse peccare.lxx The eschaton stands in a completely correlative relationship with history, and not only with the history of guilt and grace, the history of Israel, Christ and christianization, but with all history. The eschaton is the synthesising, the recapitulation and consummation of history to unity.lxxi Thus there is no restitutio in integrum. In demonstrating that there is not an identity of the original creation and the eschatological kingdom we have also answered the next three objections presented by Moltmann. It can be plainly seen that there is not an unhistorical understanding of God and human reality in Van Ruler's theology. The speculative question of when the next fall would take place has also been unambiguously answered. If the kingdom was the same as creation then it would be true that it must be said of creation that there God was 'all in all', but with the plus exhibited in the eschaton above the proton it cannot be said in exactly the same sense that God was all in all in both proton and eschaton. Before the Fall God had a direct relationship with man (Gen. 3:8) but even then there was room for growth toward perfection. This is the idea that is expressed by the theologoumenon of the covenant of works, that by his obedience Adam would have entered into a closer communion with God.lxxii Thus it would be wrong to think of creation as a closed event which produced a static and perfect result, a completed world in 29 a 'state of rectitude'. God was not 'all in all' in the proton in the same sense that he will be 'all in all' in the eschaton. The proton must be thought of in terms of the posse non peccare before man has actualized his freedom (Tillich) and chosen for good or for evil while the eschaton must be understood in terms of the non posse peccare.lxxiii Moltmann's sixth objection states that in Van Ruler's functional christology there is no actualization or fulfilment of the kingdom in the present. But this objection is contrary to the whole thrust of Van Ruler's theology. Through the person and work of Christ all reality has been saved. The guilt of existence has been reconciled, death and the demons have been overcome. Once and for all the kingdom of God has been set up in Christ. In Christ we are really and truly saved. The kingdom of God is present as salvation in Christ. However this kingdom is concealed in the flesh and will be revealed in the eschaton. The kingdom of Christ exists in the present as a modality of the kingdom of God. The fact that the kingdom of Christ is a modality of the kingdom of God is not a confirmation of Moltmann's further objection that Van Ruler's christology is modalistic. This would only be true if Van Ruler did not distinguish between the divine and the human natures of Christ and did not support the 'extra calvinisticum'. Therefore this objection could only be maintained if the Son of God is completely described by the incarnation, by the form of the crucified - as occurs in Moltmann's theology.lxxiv In any case does Van Ruler's thought result in an unchristian monotheism or pantheism? Van Ruler understands the trinity in the terms of the confessions of the Church. God is one in essence, yet distinguished in three persons, which are co-eternal and co-essential (Belgic Confession, Article 8) According to Van Ruler, in his mercy the Second Person of the trinity took on human flesh to save us from sin. In the 30 eschaton this veil of flesh falls away and then "nothing will remain other than the triune God and all things in their naked (redeemed) existence."lxxv Thus God continues to exist in his eternal triune nature as this has always been confessed by the Christian Church. There is no trace of an unchristian monotheism in Van Ruler's thought. Van Ruler is also aware of the danger that 'the naked (redeemed) existence of things' might be understood pantheistically and says: "No matter how strong the inclination that this eschatological perspective is the same as pantheism...the border between Creator and creation is respected. But all mediation between God and the world and with this all particularity in created reality falls away."lxxvi We have examined each of Moltmann's objections and seen them, without exception, to be incorrect. It would seem Moltmann has not understood Van Ruler's theology after all. Anyway their theologies are absolutely opposed to each other and rest on completely different interpretations of Scripture. According to Moltmann the Son of God became flesh to condemn creation and replace it with a nova creatio. The mediating work of Christ does come to an end but he remains as the crucified and as the ground of the new creation.lxxvii Van Ruler, however, follows the Reformed understanding of reconciliation as substitution in which creation is respected as creation and held fast in faith. There is indeed newness, novitas. The new, however is precisely the old, only radically renewed, totally redeemed from all forms of corruption.lxxviii Van Ruler states: "when one does not understand the Gospel in Israelitic terms one understands it in gnostic terms. Tertium non datur."lxxix The question is whether Moltmann's theology is really christian theology and what the consequences of this theology would be for the Christian Church. However this is beyond the boundaries of this essay and our discussion of Moltmann's theology and his objections will end here. 31 Notes for Chapter one i. A.A. van Ruler Theologische Werk (Referred to as: Th.W. from now on) Vol 1 Callenbach, Nijkerk 1969, Pg 164. ii. One could equally say 'orthodox', which is defined as: "conforming to the christian faith as established by the early church" Collins English Dictionary Collins, London 1979. Throughout this dissertation the traditional or orthodox understanding (as, for instance, contained in the creeds of the early church and the creeds of the reformed church) will occupy an important place because Berkouwer has stated " One might say of Van Ruler's point of view that it addresses a question to the tradition: has ecclesiastical tradition been fully aware of the meaning and implications of the messianic intermezzo?" He answers this in the negative, "The church traditionally has proceeded in another direction." The Return of Christ Eerdmans 1981 Pg 431. As stated in the introduction one of the aims of this dissertation is to show that Berkouwer's negative answer to this question is incorrect. iii . Regarding this question Calvin refers to "the vague speculations that captivate the frivolous and the seekers after novelty" Institutes The Library of Christian Classics, Westminister press, Philadelphia, 2.12.4 iv. Berkouwer The Work of Christ Eerdmans, Michigan, 1984 Pg 21 v. Ibid. vi. Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Baker Book house, Michigan, 1978 from J.H. Heidegger. Pg 285, quotation is vii. Berkouwer The Work of Christ Eerdmans, Michigan, 1984 Pg 23. viii. Ibid Pg 30. ix. This reaction must not be understood as a merely incidental reaction in the midst of the course of history against a factor (The Fall) that was absolutely and entirely outside the will of God. Scripture does mention the connection between our salvation in Christ and God's eternal decree, but this will be discussed in chapter 3. x. Cited in Berkouwer The Work of Christ Pg 22. xi. Calvin Institutes op. cit. xii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 164. xiii. Ibid. 32 xiv. Melanchthon Loci 1521: "hoc est Christum cognoscere, beneficia eius cognoscere, non quod isti docent eius naturas, modos incarnationis contueri." Quoted in G.C. Berkouwer The Person of Christ Eerdmans Michigan 1977 Pg 102. xv. Ibid. xvi. Ibid Pg 103 xvii. Calvin Institutes 3.11.10 xviii. A.A. van Ruler Bijzonder en Algemeen Ambt Callenbach, Nijkerk 1952 Pg 71. xix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W.I Pg 177-178. xx. G.C. Berkouwer op. cit. Pg 106. xxi . H. Bavinck Gereformeerde Dogmatiek III, J.H. Kok Kampden 1967 Pg351; cf. Berkouwer The Work of Christ Pg 70. xxii. J.H. Heidegger quoted in Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Pg 449. xxiii. P. Tillich Systematic Theology II, University of Chicago Press, USA, 1976 Pg 150. xxiv. P. van Hoof Intermezzo Ton Bolland, Amsterdam 1974 Pg 75. xxv. A.A. van Ruler Gestaltwerdung Christi in der Welt, Neukirchen, 1956 Pg 34. xxvi. Harnack A. History of Dogma Noble Offset Printers, USA, 1958 Vol. 6 Pg 60. xxvii. Anselm quoted in Seeberg R. Text book of the History of Doctrines Baker Book House, Michigan, 1964 Vol. 2 Pg 67. xxviii. Ibid. xxix. Harnack op. cit. Pg 63. xxx . A.A. van Ruler De Vervulling van de Wet (From now on referred to as: V.W.) Callenbach Nijkerk 1947 Pg 98. xxxi. P. Tillich A history of Christian Thought. Simon and Schuster USA 1968 Pg 166. xxxii. Not only from the New Testament but the function of Old Testament sacrifices could also be referred to. xxxiii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W I Pg 181. xxxiv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W II Pg 223. 33 xxxv. H. Ridderbos The Coming of the Kingdom Presbyterian and Reformed USA 1962 Pg 8-13. xxxvi. B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Unpublished D.D. Thesis 1963 Pg 1. xxxvii. Ibid Pg 33. xxxviii. Ibid Pg 54. xxxix. Ibid Pg 4. xl. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Callenbach Nijkerk 1978 Pg 37. 41 Ibid Pg 34. xlii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 82-86. xliii. B. Engelbrecht Ibid Pg 35. xliv. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament 1971 Pg 71. xlv. Ibid Pg 42. xlvi. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Callenbach Nijkerk 1945 Pg 139. xlvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 90-93. xlviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 171. xlix. Ibid Pg 165. l. Ibid Pg 164. li. Ibid Pg 165. lii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 149. liii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 173. liv. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Pg 69. lv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 171. lvi. Ibid. lvii. J. Moltmann The Crucified God Pg 257. lviii. Ibid Pg 186-188. 34 lix. A.A. van Ruler Gestaltwerdung Christi in der Welt Pg 34-35 quoted in The Crucified God Pg 260. lx. J. Moltmann op. cit. Pg 261 lxi. These objections are presented on pages 261-265 of Moltmann's book The Crucified God. lxii. J. Moltmann Ibid Pg 261. lxiii. Bauke in G.C. Berkouwer The Person of Christ Pg 283. lxiv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 177-178. lxv. G.C. Berkouwer The Person of Christ Pg 285. lxvi . B. Engelbrecht Die Gekruisigde God en die Messianse Intermezzo in Ned Geref Teologiese Tydskrif Part 17 No. 3 June 1976 Pg 139. lxvii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 170. lxviii. Ibid Pg 169. lxix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 226. lxx. Ibid Pg 229. lxxi. Ibid Pg 225. lxxii. H. Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Pg 281, 295. lxxiii. Those who have rejected salvation will be rejected from the kingdom of God (2 Pet. 2). lxxiv. B. Engelbrecht Ibid Pg 142. lxxv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 171. lxxvi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 93. lxxvii. J. Moltmann op. cit. Pg 266. lxxviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 223. lxxix. A.A. van Ruler quoted by B. Engelbrecht op.cit. Pg 135. 35 Chapter 2 History and Eschatology. In this chapter we will discuss Van Ruler's idea of the kingdom of God and its importance for our understanding of history. This will involve a discussion of his thought 'from out of the end', that is, that the kingdom creates history and history moves toward the kingdom and provides the totality of ingredients that make up this kingdom. Once we have seen the importance of the kingdom we will move on to a discussion of the question regarding the relationship of Jesus Christ with this kingdom in the original and final intentions of God. The Kingdom of God. Before we proceed with our discussion of Van Ruler's ideas, we must clarify the notion of the kingdom of God. This notion is important for two reasons: Firstly the concept of the kingdom of God involves the total message of the Bible.i The Old Testament knows of the dominion of God over the whole world because He is the creator of heaven and earth.ii But it also knows of the special relationship between God and the chosen people, Israel: the theocratic relationship.iii Founded on the confession that God is king the Old Testament also expects that He will become king in an intensified and an eschatological sense. iv In the New Testament the kingdom of God is also central; the content of the New Testament kerygma is the coming of the kingdom.v Jesus began his ministry saying: "The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe the Gospel" (Mark 1:14). The message of the 41 New Testament is that the kingdom has come, but it also expects a future consummation of the kingdom.vi Thus it can be seen that the concept of the kingdom is central to the entire Bible. Secondly, the notion of the kingdom is important because Van Ruler's theology is "nothing other than a confession of the kingdom of God."vii Some different understandings of the kingdom of God. In order to appreciate Van Ruler's understanding of the kingdom we will present, in summary, a few contrasting understandings of the kingdom of God,viii with the names of those who represent them. The approach of 'consistent eschatology' states that the coming of the kingdom must be understood exclusively as the intrusion of the great final catastrophe (A. Schweitzer, M. Werner). W. Bousset supported a metaphysical-dualistic understanding which presents the kingdom as an eternal, invisible world of a higher order that surrounds our world. The liberal theologians Harnack and Wellhausen represent an ethical-evolutionary approach which states that the kingdom is a reality in the souls of mankind. The eschatological aspect is relegated entirely to the background and is understood as merely an accommodation to the conditions of the time in which Jesus lived. R. Bultmann represents the crisis or 'Entscheidungs' approach which sees the New Testament idea of the approaching end of the world as belonging to the mythology of the time. The kingdom consists of the idea that every moment man is confronted with the necessity of deciding because the 'now' is the last hour for him. The dominion of God does not enter the world but invokes man to make a choice against the world. C. H. Dodd is well known for his realized eschatology which states that with the coming of 42 Jesus the eschaton has become present instead of future, from the sphere of expectation it has passed into that of experience. The eschatological expectation has been fulfilled as a spiritual reality. The salvation history approach rejects the notion that the kingdom is developing in this world as an immanent entity, as well as the basic tenet of radical eschatology, according to which the kingdom is supposed to have merely a future character. The dynamic meaning of the concept 'kingdom of God' is emphasised, that is, the eschatological, redeeming and judging activity of God. The coming of the kingdom has a redemptive historical significance. That which Jesus preaches is not a timeless truth and what he brings is not only a new spirituality, a new disposition. It is also not a new form of society in the sense of the social gospel or an action carried on by men and slowly developing to its consummation. The kingdom is present on this earth as an historical reality, but in its eschatological essence it goes beyond this reality and includes more. In this sense authors like J.Jeremias, E.Stauffer, O.Cullmann and W.G.Kummel try to do justice to both the eschatological and the present character of the kingdom. Van Ruler's understanding of the kingdom. Van Ruler's understanding of the kingdom of God is in accord with the Biblical-Reformed understanding of it - which is in essence the salvation history approach outlined above. The other approaches, as outlined above, are guided by ideological presuppositions and fail to do justice to the text of the gospels,ix neglecting either the dynamic presence of the kingdom or its future consummation. In order to do justice to the biblical proclamation the kingdom must be seen as a present 43 reality as well as a future one. However, in order to prevent being guided by ideological presuppositions, Van Ruler talks of the kingdom only in the terms in which it has been revealed in Scripture. This rules out much speculation - it has not yet been revealed to us what the kingdom of glory is and what we will then be (1 John 3:2). The kingdom of God is also not an ideal to be strived for or realized by man on earth. The sparseness in the New Testament of all attributive and predicative definitions of the kingdom places a border against all immanent misconceptions of the concept and prevents the kingdom of God from being used as a manageable ideal in this world.x At this point Van Ruler comes forward with a definition of the kingdom, namely that the kingdom of God is in essence soteriological and eschatological. xi This definition respects the immanence as well as the transcendence of the kingdom. In order to understand Van Ruler's definition of the kingdom we must first consider the transcendence of the kingdom.xii The Transcendence of the Kingdom. The transcendence of the kingdom is bound to the resurrection (Mark 12:18-27) and rebirth (Mt. 19:28). The kingdom exists on the other side of death, namely the death of Jesus. Therefore the transcendence of the kingdom must not be understood in a static spacial sense, from which a two world metaphysic or an ontological dualism could be deduced.xiii In order to clearly understand this, Van Ruler distinguishes three moments in this transcendence.xiv In the first place it refers to the overwhelming power with which God works with his world. "Het rijk is het overmachtige handelen Gods met deze wereld. Het rijk is dit, dat God iets met deze wereld doet."xv Thus the idea of the kingdom is directed only at this 44 world and the overwhelming power of the acts of God indicates God's victory over all historical and cosmic demonic powers. In the second place it means that the kingdom is concealed. Nobody knows why it is the Father's pleasure to give the kingdom (Luke 12:32) or when the kingdom will come (Acts 1:6,7) and what the kingdom is (1 Cor. 2:9; 1 John 3:2). The kingdom of God is not fully described by words such as forgiveness of sins, justice, childhood etc. Something always remains that is to be expected and is not yet known. In the third place it refers to the soteriological character of the kingdom. The miracles of Jesus consist especially in the healing of sickness and the exorcism of demonic powers. The salvation character of the kingdom is also clearly spoken out by all the attributes, synonyms and predicates of the kingdom presented in Scripture. God comes in order to overcome sin and death and the demons. The transcendence of the kingdom is not metaphysical but soteriological. "Het rijk is een handelen Gods met deze wereld ter redding uit het verderf, dat over haar is gekomen en waaraan zij is prijsgegeven." xvi Following this understanding of transcendence and in order to express the salvation-historical and the eschatological-soteriological character of the kingdom of God, Van Ruler presents the following definition : "Onder het koninkrijk Gods in bijbelschen zin is te verstaan : het uiteindelijke en heilrijke handelen Gods met deze wereld."xvii The Immanence of the Kingdom. From this understanding of the transcendence of the kingdom we can properly understand the immanence as the presence of the kingdom. The kingdom of God is nothing other than the penetration of God into the reality of the world and of history.xviii 45 The content of the New Testament proclamation is the coming of the kingdom through the person and work of Christ and we have seen in chapter one that this is to be understood par excellence as a work of God to save this world from sin. We have also seen that to acknowledge the benefits of the work of Christ (salvation) is to be included in the body of Christ. Thus the kingdom is present as salvation in Christ. xix The kingdom of God is completely actual in the present as the kingdom of Christ, as the concealed victory over all resistance.xx The immanence of the kingdom is the real salvation given in Christ - this is the soteriological component of the kingdom. The eschatological component is the unveiling of this salvation. However one could not say it is 'only' the revelation of redemption that was until then concealed. Redemption is an unspeakably great thing, but then the revelation of redemption (that is, the final consummation) is also something totally unheard of.xxi The Kingdom of God and History. The kingdom of God is the final and saving work of God with this world. "Vanuit zijn toekomst, waarin hij op ons toekomt vanuit het einde en de voleinding van alle dingen, dringt de levende God in ons heden op en breekt hij er in door en poneert hij zichzelf en zijn rijk in onze existentie."xxii God posits himself in our existence and sets up his kingdom, and based on the confession that God is king now, there arises the expectation that he will become king in an intensified and eschatological sense.xxiii This expectation makes existence historical.xxiv The circle of nature is broken and reality is directed at its future.xxv God appears in our reality and sets up his kingdom and thus makes existence historical. Thus history is to be understood in terms of God's work with this world, namely the saving of this world to his kingdom. Now according to the Bible, and as we have seen in Van Ruler's 46 definition, the kingdom of God is the final work of God with this world, in other words the kingdom is eschatological, that is: transcendent. God comes upon us from his eschatological essence, from his future and thus creates history.xxvi Therefore history is to be understood from the transcendence of the kingdom of God. In order to see the connection of events and the organic unity in a specific stage of history, we need to stand at a distance. This distance is the transcendence of the kingdom of God. History, or that which is happening in the world is to be seen and understood, not from a distance in space or from a distance in time. The kingdom of God is not transcendent in a static-ontological sense as another place, sphere or world next to or above our temporal-spacial world but in the sense of God's concealed victory over all resistance.xxvii Thus the idea that history is to be understood from the perspective of the kingdom of God means that God is busy doing something with this world - He is saving it to his kingdom, and this salvation is present as a concealed victory over his enemies. This does not mean that history has become transparent. The kingdom remains transcendent, this transcendence is being put into effect in our present reality but it will only be fully revealed at the end.xxviii But this does not detract from the fact that from the biblical proclamation of the kingdom of God we know God is busy doing his work in this visible and tangible reality in which we live. Thus Van Ruler understands history in terms of the biblical proclamation of the kingdom of God as God's final work with this world. We stand directed at the future, at the kingdom, as it comes upon us from the future. With this we come to the kernel idea of Van Ruler in connection with history, namely that the concept of history is in essence a biblical concept.xxix Revelation creates history and makes existence historical. xxx We have already seen that the presence of salvation causes the eschatological expectation and thus gives rise to history but in order to clarify this idea we 47 can note the following: In the first place the kernel of the biblical doctrine of God, which also separates the biblical understanding of God from all paganism, is that the living God is not to be understood in his essence as Being that rests eternally in itself, but rather as Will. The God of the Bible is the God of history. He appears in the field of reality as Lord and makes existence historical.xxxi God himself appears with his revelation and salvation. God is not a determined form, but The Concealed who is met in the concealment of the reality of life, as it occurs, in a concealed manner. "Man cannot say: this or that is God; also not: everything is God; even less: God is nothing. Man can only actually meet him."xxxii The fact that God is God in this manner means that reality does not have its own 'essence' but is "'de werkelijkheid': het al of niet ontmoeten van God; de reidans der daden Gods; zijn verkiezend en verwerpend handelen."xxxiii This gives existence its historical character: "zij geschiedt en zij staat in de geschiedenis en er geschiedt ook iets in."xxxiv In the second place the historical character of revelation itself is to be noted. Revelation is not to be understood as information about 'divine things' which may or may not have saving consequences. "The history of revelation and the history of salvation are the same history. Revelation can be received only in the presence of salvation, and salvation can occur only within a correlation of revelation." Even the condemning function of revelation is a basic part of the process of salvation.xxxv Revelation is identical to salvation and the kingdom of God is present as salvation in Christ. Thus revelation, understood as the reconciliation of guilt,xxxvi as the beneficial and concealed presence of God in the flesh is not only something that happens in history but is the essence of history. The eschatological expectation makes existence historical and this expectation is based on the saving presence of God. This saving presence is the reconciliation of guilt, therefore revelation itself is history par excellence and the actual mystery of history must be acknowledged as the reconciliation of guilt.xxxvii From 48 this it can be seen that history is the putting into effect of the sacrifice of reconciliation in all existence, it is a "permanente syntaxis van schuld en verzoening."xxxviii In the third place we must note the historical character of the kingdom of God. The definition of the kingdom as God's saving and final work with this world conveys the idea that the eschatological kingdom of God has already come from out of the future, so that the kingdom must be understood as an act of God from out of the end with this world. The presence of this eschatological reality creates history by producing the eschatological expectation. God is doing something in the present (erecting his kingdom) and will do something completely new in the future (consummate his kingdom). Precisely this makes existence historical. "In the light of the eschaton we can see that all existence and all reality exists in the acts of God."xxxix This implies that existence is indeed historical and does not have its own ontological character. Existence is what God does to it.xl In the fourth place we must note the distinction between the messianic and pneumatic moments in salvation. The distinction consists of the fact that the work of the Holy Spirit is more inclusive than the work of the Messiah, in the sense that the Spirit gives expression to and spreads the sacrifice of reconciliation in existence.xli The gift of the Spirit and his work is an historical act of God, a fact of salvation that must be understood from the standpoint of the end, from the coming kingdom of God. The specifically historical character of this work consists of the fact that from the coming kingdom the Spirit creates history in the chaos of existence, that is: He allows history to spread around the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore the Spirit is not a moment in history but the origin of history. "History is the form, called up by the Spirit, created out of the nothing of the fallen world and lost existence .....History is the predicate of the Spirit."xlii Before we continue it must be noted that the outpouring of the Spirit is not a fact of salvation 49 that occurred in the middle of history, but rather in the last days (Acts 2:17), thus from the kingdom that is coming upon us. Therefore it goes back to the beginning; it also includes the history of Israel under the Old Covenant; the fulfilment of the Old Testament is to be understood as a fulfilment in the Messiah through the Holy Spirit; history cannot be divided into a period before and a period after Pentecost; and that which is specifically new in the New Testament cannot be seen in the saving fact of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.xliii With the claim that God's presence in the Spirit creates history, history receives the character of particularity and stands in the closest connection with election. Therefore, if history is spoken of, the nation Israel and the Old Testament come immediately to the foreground.xliv In Israel God elected a time and a place and a nation for His presence on earth. So Israel alone, in the midst of the heathen nations, had history in the proper sense of the word. But because election is always pars pro toto, the election of Israel must also be seen as a token and a seal and a guarantee of God's purpose with the world. Election and mission are the two fundamental components of the concept of history.xlv From Israel God comes to the nations of the earth. The fact that salvation makes existence historical means that the entire concept of history originates from the gospel and its proclamation, from God's revelation in Israel and in Jesus Christ. Thus world history must be understood in its essence as mission history.xlvi With this we have anticipated the next topic. The Meaning of History. From the above it is obvious that the meaning of history is to be found in the kingdom of God, indeed the kingdom of God even creates history, and all history is moving toward the eschatological kingdom. But with this we have not yet seen the specific significance of 50 history. Is the significance of history to be found in God's patience, so that history is only a time that is allowed for man to repent (K. Barth), or is it more than this? In order to answer this question we must first consider the following question: what is the content of the eschatological kingdom? There are three possible answers to this question.xlvii The first is the refusal to answer because it is considered an unapproachable mystery, the mystery of the divine glory. But this is the easy way out, in fact it is no answer at all because 'kingdom' is a concrete symbol and "if concrete symbols are used at all, mere silence about their meaning is not permitted."xlviii Another answer sees the eschatological kingdom as having no direct relation to history and the development of the universe. It is established in eternity, and the problem of human existence is whether and in what way individuals may enter this transcendent realm. History is understood merely as the element in which the individual must make decisions, relevant to his own salvation but irrelevant for the kingdom of God which is above history. History is the earthly realm out of which individuals are moved into the heavenly realm. The third answer asserts that the ever present end of history (understood as the transcendence of the kingdom of God) elevates the positive content of history into eternity at the same time that it excludes the negative from participation in it. Therefore nothing which has been created in history is lost, but it is liberated from the negative element with which it is entangled within existence. The eschatological kingdom of God thus includes the positive content of history, liberated from its negative distortions and fulfilled in its potentialities. The question of the content of the eschaton must be answered from the biblical doctrine of salvation. This is obvious because if we understand salvation in a gnostic sense as salvation from this world we will only see the significance of history as a chance given for us to repent; but if we understand salvation in biblical-reformed terms as a salvation of this world we will 51 see the significance of history in the fact that it is the totality of ingredients which make up the eschatological kingdom of God.xlix We have already seen in chapter one that the Son of God was incarnated in order to save this world from sin and not to ontologically replace this world with a new world. We are not saved from this world, we are saved together with it, in our historical existence. This contains the idea that in the eschaton we will come across our present realities again. In other words this world and what is realized in it supplies the totality of the ingredients of the eschaton. "Since there is an historical dimension in all realms of life...one could say that life in the whole of creation and in a special way in human history contributes in every moment of time to the Kingdom of God and its eternal life. What happens in time and space, in the smallest particle of matter as well as in the greatest personality is significant for the eternal life."l At this point we see the significance of the biblical doctrine of the resurrection of the flesh. There is an identity of the self regarding the person who died and the person who is resurrected (That very person is resurrected). There is also an identity of the self in its corporeality (Resurrection of the flesh). There is even an identity of the self in its temporality. "What am I? What other than this piece of filled time? As such I am and as such I am saved. In the eschaton I find this piece of filled time, that I call my life, that I myself am, returned."li The biblical idea of resurrection and what is implied by it is not limited to the resurrection of individuals. "The symbol of resurrection is often used in a more general sense to express the certainty of Eternal Life rising out of the death of temporal life. In this sense it is a symbolic way of expressing the central theological concept of the New Being. As the New Being is not another being, but the transformation of the old being, so resurrection is not the creation of another reality over against the old reality but is the transformation of the old reality, arising out of its death. In this sense the term 'resurrection' (without particular reference to the 52 resurrection of the body) has become a universal symbol for the eschatological hope."lii Therefore we can say that there is a completely correlative relationship between the eschaton and history. This means that the one component is just as essential for the other as the other for that one. There is a full reciprocity. We have already seen that the eschaton creates history, now we can add to this and say history provides all the ingredients of the eschaton. Thus the eschaton is more than the goal of history. It is the summarizing, the recapitulation and consummation of history to unity. Through this, history is made fully into history: its unity, its connection, the solidarity of its parts become visible.liii Having answered the question of the content of the eschatological kingdom we can resume our discussion of the meaning of history. In the first place we can completely reject the idea that history only exists under God's patience, as a time that is allowed for man to repent. This idea contradicts the biblical concept of salvation (discussed in chapter one) as well as the biblical idea of resurrection. Secondly, in order to further understand the significance of history, we must keep an eye on God's Judgement as God's rejection of that which rejects Him.liv With Tillich we could say that in the permanent transition of the temporal to the eternal, divine judgement is to be understood as the rejection of the claim of the negative to be positive. In this sense God in his eternal life is called a 'burning fire', burning that which pretends to be positive but is not. But as the negative lives from the positive it distorts and therefore nothing is only negative, nothing that has being can be ultimately annihilated; but it can be excluded from eternity in so far as it is mixed with non-being and not yet liberated from it.lv In other words, all creation is Gods creation and as such is good (Gen. 1:31). It has come under the curse of sin but Christ came to save this world from sin, and this world 53 returns in the eschaton. We could think of the salvation of this world in terms of God plucking a burning coal out of a fire, the whole is saved but some sparks fly off.lvi Thus the whole is saved and freed from the negativities of sin - even the demons serve a positive function in the kingdom: they are made to be stools for the feet of God or Christ (Ps. 110:1; Heb. 10:13). This must not be understood in terms of an apokatastasis panton, as the restoration of all things, and beatitude, not for some, but for all. The possibility of eternal lostness must be kept open. All humanity depends on this. "Man is only man if in his lifetime he has the freedom to fall, that applies for all eternity. If the emphasis of eternity no longer stands on time, time becomes worthless."lvii Anyway man's participation in the kingdom of God depends on the choices he makes in his historical existence.lviii This gives an infinite weight to every decision and creation in time and space. Now man can choose for or against salvation and "everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved." This quotation continues with the following significant words: "But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher? And how can men preach unless they are sent?" (Rom. 10:13-16). With this we have, at last, come back to the point with which we concluded the previous section, namely, that in its essence world history is to be understood as mission history. From Israel God comes to the nations of the earth; the apostles went into the world with the gospel of the kingdom; and the church directs itself at all people with the gospel of the kingdom. It directs itself to all nations (Mat. 28:19) in their pagan context of being. This apostolic meaning of history has a positive and a negative side. It consists negatively of the breaking of the works of the devil and in the reconciliation of guilt. "Alle werk Gods is zijn bezigheid - in den messias, door den Geest - in het vleesch, om datgene, wat gedaan is, ongedaan te krijgen; 54 de schuld der zonde te verzoenen; en zoo de aarde weer schoon te vegen."lix All history must be seen in this light. This breaking of the works of the devil and the reconciliation of guilt occurred once and for all in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But it is spread in historical existence by the work of the Spirit. In this apostolic process of christianization it is not only individuals that are converted, but rather there is a breaking and upsetting of the whole pagan context of being as such. The kingdom of God comes in place of paganism.lx This is the positive side of the apostolic meaning of history. The salvation of God works itself out in existence so "that man may again stand up out of destruction, so that he may bathe in the overflowing light of God's glory on the cleansed earth."lxi This world must be lived as His kingdom; His image must be expressed in this reality; this life must be sanctified to His service. Therefore sanctification and not forgiveness is the meaning of history; sanctification understood in a biblical, reformed sense as living before God's countenance in the world and in time.lxii We can clarify this idea of the positive side of the apostolic meaning of history by saying: "de zonde is er bij gekomen, bij het proton, en bovendien de verwerking van de zonde, enerzijds in de verzoening, welke de eigenlijke verlossing is, en anderzijds in de heiliging, welke ook reeds verheerlijking is."lxiii Sanctification is already glorification. This does not mean that we already experience the eschatological kingdom of Glory - there is a modal difference between the present and the future kingdom. What it does emphasize is the fact that history contributes to the eschatological kingdom to the extent that it has been sanctified. With this we see the importance of the apostolic meaning of history and the significance of the confession of the kingdom of God in the present. The kingdom of God is not to be understood as a static theocracy but as a militant holiness that is not immanent in the world, 55 but is imminently breaking into the world. And this imminence of the kingdom is not to be understood only christologically but also pneumatologically. lxiv Therefore history is to be understood as God's ascension to the throne. This ascension is a struggle, God's struggle with the flesh. God rules in medio inimicorum (Ps. 110; 1 Cor. 15). Man's resistance to God's lordship is revealed in the historical process. This is one of the purposes of the Law, to produce the consciousness of guilt (Rom. 7). But this resistance and guilt of man does not hinder God's ascension to the throne. On the contrary, the other side of God's ascension to the throne lies in the reconciliation of guilt. His throne is the cross.lxv Before we leave this topic we must note two things; Firstly, history provides the 'plus' of the eschaton above the proton. Through the experience of sin and grace we go from the posse non peccare to the non posse peccare, and the eschaton is no restitutio in integrum, but the synthesising, recapitulation and consummation of history to unity. Secondly, even without sin and thus without salvation there would have been history and the eschaton would have exhibited a plus above the proton. That is the meaning of the theologoumenon of the covenant of works.lxvi Jesus Christ and The Kingdom of God. We have seen that the kingdom of God is the aim of all history and that the kingdom has appeared (in a concealed form) with the coming of Christ. Now we must look at the relation between Christ and the kingdom. There are several different perspectives from which we can consider this question, namely, the protological, the present and the eschatological relationship of Christ to the kingdom. These perspectives cannot be easily separated because they overlap and are intertwined with each other. The protological cannot be abstracted from 56 the eschatological as the question of the last things is also the question of the first things,lxvii the final intention is the original intention. The present cannot be separated from the proton, that is, it must somehow fit into God's intentions; and the present also cannot be separated from the eschaton as the eschaton creates history and history provides the ingredients of the eschaton. For the remainder of this chapter we will concentrate on the protological aspect of God's original and final intention for this world and how Jesus Christ and sin fit into the eternal decree. In the next chapter we will concentrate on the christological character of the present kingdom and the idea that Christ's veil of flesh is undone in the eschaton. Infralapsarianism Versus Supralapsarianism. In the following section we will look at the theological idea of God's eternal decree and how this is understood by Van Ruler. At the outset of this discussion it must be pointed out that the idea of the eternal decree is a theologoumenon that is scarcely found in the Bible and as such it must not be taken by itself and made into the starting point of all theology. It must be kept in context.lxviii The idea of the eternal decree is obviously speculative, but this does not mean that it is unimportant. In so far as one thinks about the beginning and the end of all things, one has to pose these speculative questions. Without this speculative context one cannot give a thoughtful, concrete answer to a single question that is asked regarding anything between the proton and the eschaton.lxix In the supralapsarian idea of the eternal decree, the first decree is understood as being that of predestination, which is followed by the decree of creation and fall. The later decrees of God (creation and fall) are subsumed under this first decree. They form the means by which the 57 primary decree of predestination is realized. The decree to election and rejection precedes all other decrees. Man appears in this decree as the homo creabilis et labilis (certain to be created and to fall). This decree is put into effect in the decree to create, to fall, and the sending of Christ for the salvation of the elect. According to the infralapsarian understanding the decree to creation and fall logically precede the decree to rejection and election, so that man appears as the homo creatus et lapsus (already created and fallen) in the counsel of God regarding election and rejection. The first decree is the creation of man. Following this are the decrees regarding the fall, election and rejection, the sending of Christ as Mediator for the elect, and the effectual calling of the latter and their presentation with faith, their justification, sanctification and final glorification.lxx Both points of view understand the decree of God as one and in all its parts equally eternal, the decrees are an actus unicus et simplicissimus, there is no question of temporal order in the decrees but "there is nothing to prevent the institution of some order in them, considered objectively and from our side according to our mode of conceiving."lxxi Both infra- and supralapsarians see the fall as included in the divine decree and preterition as an act of God's sovereign will. Originally the point of difference between the two positions was whether the fall was decreed or was merely the object of divine foreknowledge. But the idea that the fall is only foreseen is Armenian not Reformed, and was therefore rejected by the Reformation. The difference between the infra and supra positions is also not to be found in any essential difference as to the question, whether the decree relative to sin is permissive. Both positions see sin as positively included in the counsel of God, although the infra position may overemphasize the permissive character of the decree and expose itself to the charge of Armenianism whereas supralapsarianism may overemphasise the positive element in the 58 decree regarding sin and thus expose itself to the charge of making God the author of sin. Both positions take sin into account regarding the decree of reprobation. This is obvious in the infra position which sees the decree of election and rejection as logically occurring after the decree of the fall. This view emphasises God's justice and mercy. Supralapsarianism emphasises God's sovereign will, but it rejects the idea that God destined some men for eternal destruction simply by an act of His sovereign will, without taking account of their sin. While it sees preterition as an act of God's sovereign will, the second element of reprobation, namely, condemnation, is an act of justice and takes account of sin. This proceeds on the supposition that logically preterition precedes the decree to create and to permit the fall, while condemnation follows this.lxxii A.A. van Ruler assumes the infralapsarian point of view and agrees with O. Noordmans that God always makes his eternal decrees at the very last moment.lxxiii This does not bring the idea of a temporal succession into the decrees, because it is the eternal God who decrees, but it does emphasise our freedom. This also emphasises the fall and sin as factors of rebellion and violation of God's holiness. Moreover the infralapsarian view also emphasises the connection between God's mercy and justice on the one hand and the sinful reality of the human race on the other hand. This does not deny the sovereignty of God, as according to Van Ruler the decree to fall must be placed squarely in the sovereign council of God.lxxiv At this point Van Ruler is saying exactly the same thing as supralapsarianism, namely, that the fall must ultimately have been part of God's counsel and therefore it 'rests' in God's sovereign goodpleasure (welbehagen). But there is nevertheless an important point of difference between Van Ruler and a supralapsarian such as K. Barth. Van Ruler sees this decree regarding the fall and election and rejection within the context of the decrees regarding 59 creation and eschaton and therefore as a means to a greater end, whereas K. Barth sees the decree of election and rejection in Christ as the beginning and end of all the ways of God. Creation and fall are therefore only means to realize this end. This has important implications for the position and importance of history in theology. In the last analysis Barth's "concept of history has its root primarily in his doctrine of God's election of grace, more specifically in his teaching on God's eternal decree before the creation of the world as the beginning of the history of God's covenant of grace with man in Jesus Christ."lxxv The fact that Barth concentrates on the eternal Decree of election causes him to view history as existing only under God's patience as a time that is allowed for man to repent. We have already rejected this idea. As Van Ruler takes an infralapsarian view and sees election as well as the work of the Spirit as moments in the eternal decree he can do justice to the historical-eschatological and trinitarian structure of christian thought. Election (and rejection) is there for the sake of creation and there is a working out of this election in history by the Spirit. Pneumatology is done justice and thus there is space in Van Ruler's theological thought for creation, man, time and history. "Zoodra men eenig accent legt op het werk van den Heiligen Geest, is het christelijke geloof niet alleen gebonden aan de evangelische en de bijbelsche geschiedenis, maar omvat het ook de kerkgeschiedenis en de zendingsgeschiedenis en raakt het daarin - op zijn wijze - de geschiedenis van het menschelijke geslacht."lxxvi Having seen that the infralapsarian position emphasises sin as rebellion against God, the incarnation of Christ as a reaction to this rebellion, the freedom of man and the fact that it does justice to the historical-eschatological trinitarian structure of christian thought, it comes 60 as no surprise that it has been accepted above the supralapsarian position in the reformed confessions. The Synod of Utrecht (1905) states "our confessions, certainly with respect to the doctrine of election, follow the infralapsarian presentation," but that "this does not at all imply an exclusion or condemnation of the supralapsarian presentation." Bavinck has also pointed out that the supralapsarian presentation has not been incorporated into a single Reformed Confession, but that the infra position has received an official place in the Confessions of the churches.lxxvii The Confessions cannot be called infralapsarian in the sense that they make explicit pronouncements on the order of the decree of God but they evidence great sympathy for the infra presentation when predestination is continually mentioned in such a manner that it is brought to bear on sin and guilt. In the Lord's day 21 of the Heidelberg Catechism we read that the Son of God has chosen a Church to life eternal out of the human race, and in Article 16 of the Belgic Confession that God preserves from perdition all whom He in His eternal and unchangeable counsel out of mere goodness has elected. The saving of the elect is referred to as an act of God, but the infra position is evident from the emphasis on God's merciful election. This is also true of the Canons of Dordt which say that the decree of rejection does not make God the author of sin, but declares Him to be an awful, irreprehensible, and righteous judge and Revenger thereof (1,15).lxxviii The inclination toward the infralapsarian concept in the Confessions is shown by the fact that reference is always made to sin and perdition whenever predestination is mentioned. We have already seen that in the supralapsarian concept the condemnation in time is directly related to sin as actual judgement presupposes guilt, but not to the decree to rejection itself. This connection is not present because the decree of predestination is thought to precede all merits and demerits therefore also the decree to creation and the decree to fall. 61 The Original and Final Purpose of Creation. The deepest difference between the infra and supra positions can be seen by what they understand the original and final purpose of creation to be. The infra position sees the purpose of creation to be creation itself, thus Tillich can say: "Creation has no purpose beyond itself. From the point of view of the creature, the purpose of creation is the creature itself and the actualization of its potentialities. From the point of view of the Creator, the purpose of creation is the exercise of his creativity, which has no purpose beyond itself because the divine life is essentially creative."lxxix And Van Ruler can say: "the redemptive work in Jesus Christ only happened in order that creation would again be able to exist before the countenance of God; it is thus only a moment, an emergency measure in the one counsel and the one work of God."lxxx The supra position on the other hand, understands the purpose of creation to something other than creation, namely salvation in Christ. Barth, for instance, understands creation as only setting the stage for the execution of the history of God's covenant of grace with man. The fulfilment of this covenant is the eternal will of God and the creation of the universe and of man has no other purpose than to serve this end. In other words "creation is the external basis of God's covenant of grace with man and this covenant is the internal basis of creation."lxxxi In support of this thesis Barth refers to Heb. 1:2; John 1:1-5 and Col. 1. Following his idea that Jesus Christ is God's first and dominant thought in his plan of creation he understands these verses to mean that the "world was created and sustained by the little child that was born in Bethlehem, by the Man who died on the Cross of Golgotha, and the third day rose again. That is the Word of Creation, by which all things were brought into being."lxxxii 62 The New Testament certainly does assert that Jesus Christ had and has an original relationship to creation and to all things. This relationship is expressed in such passages as John 1:1-5; 1 Cor. 8:6; 15:44-49; Eph. 1:10,22f; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:1-4; Rev. 3:14. In the following pages we will look at this original relationship.lxxxiii The problem facing us now is how to interpret the above mentioned references to Scripture. According to H. Berkhof (following K. Barth) these passages do not refer to a trinitarian dwelling of the Son with the Father, but to a co-operating of the historical Jesus with God in the work of creation. "If the man Jesus was from eternity in the mind of God, it follows that as a covenant partner he was also from eternity over against the Father."lxxxiv Berkhof also states: "Traditional dogmatics heard in these passages information about the role which the second person of the Trinity, who later became man, already had in the work of creation. But these statements have nothing to do with the Trinity problematic. They do, however, make a close connection between creation and the work of the historical Jesus Christ. Without a distinct transition the four passages speak of the one Christ who created the world and brought about redemption."lxxxv Berkhof goes on to say that since Barth's thesis of 'creation as the external basis of the covenant and the covenant as the internal basis of creation' we can see that nearly two thousand years of tradition is completely wrong in its dogmatic interpretation of the above mentioned Scripture!lxxxvi He dismisses the traditional interpretation by his idea that it has generally based itself on a reading of Genesis 1 and 2 which regards these chapters as containing divine information about a past which is inaccessible to us and thus supports the idea that creation was a closed event, one which produced a static and perfect result. In his original perfect state man could earn eternal life through the covenant of works, but because of the fall God had to open up an entirely different way to eternal life. Berkhof then contrasts this with the idea that Adam was not the perfect man, but the novice who by making the right 63 choice is to attain to a higher degree of fellowship with God.lxxxvii It seems to me that Berkhof has misrepresented - or at least one-sidedly represented - the traditional theologoumenon of the covenant of works and the idea of the state of creation before the fall. Even if we go as far back as Augustine who understands man's original state in terms of the posse non peccare;lxxxviii this means that he understood the original state of man as open possibility and not 'static perfection'. What could the theologoumenon of the covenant of works signify, other than the idea that 'Adam is not the perfect man, but the novice who by making the right choice is to attain to a higher degree of fellowship with God'? Anyway, this is Van Ruler's, as well as the traditional reformed understanding of the covenant of works.lxxxix "Sin consists inter alia of the fact that we no longer understand ourselves and the world in our createdness in and through the Word. We do not want to know it. Therefore we do not know it."xc Van Ruler would certainly agree with Berkhof that Genesis 1 or 2 does not contain divine information about a past which is inaccessible to us. We have seen that revelation is redemption and therefore that all revelation bears the character of redemption. We only know of the Word through whom we and the world were created because he came to us in the incarnation. Gnoseologically the mediation of redemption precedes the mediation of creation.xci The question now is whether this gnoseologic order is identical to the ontological order. If we follow K. Barth and H. Berkhof in answering this question affirmatively we would have to say that Christ's mediation of redemption refers to his essence. This is unavoidable if we understand God's first decree to be salvation in Christ. However this implies that Christ's mediation of creation also refers to his essence. This is obvious because his mediation of creation is a moment in his mediation of redemption. This means that the essence of creation is to be found in God! Christianly speaking is this an acceptable idea? 64 Must we not rather say "dat er een grens is tussen de werkelijkheid en God? En ligt dat niet daaraan, dat we de grond van de werkelijkheid niet zo onvervaard moeten zoeken in God, maar enerzijds in zijn vrijmachtige welbehagen, dus in zijn decreet, zijn raad, waarin het willen vooropgaat en het denken begeleidend aanwezig is, en anderzijds in zijn daad van de schepping? De raad en de daad staan ertussen, tussen de geschapen werkelijkheid en God. Zij zijn de onophefbare en onoverschrijdbare grens."xcii These theses contain the notions of transcendence and the 'theistic' autonomy of God. If they are ignored the world can no longer be experienced in its reality and earthliness and an individual cannot experience his individuality and humanness (except perhaps as 'maya').xciii We are still faced with the problem of how to interpret the Scripture quotations referred to above. We have rejected the idea that the ontological order is identical to the gnoseologic order. The idea that ontologically the mediation of creation precedes the mediation of redemption seems to provide a better solution. Traditionally the opera ad extra of the Trinity are one and therefore the Son of God (who later became the mediator of redemption) is to be understood as mediator of creation in this sense. The Scripture references are to be understood in this context. According to Berkhof they (the biblical references) make such a close connection between the work of the historical Jesus and creation that they have nothing to do with the Trinity.xciv O. Noordmans writes that the dogma of the Trinity was introduced by the Church to keep the confession of Christ pure.xcv The doctrine of the two natures of Christ is also of decisive importance and no doubt also keeps the confession of Christ pure. Thus E. Stauffer states: "Das ist das Zwiefache Bekenntnis, das Johannes ablegt und fordert, das Bekenntnis zum wahrhaftiger Gottheit und zum wahrhaftigen Menschentum Jesu Christi. 65 Wer an dieses Zwiefache Bekenntnis ruhrt, hier oder dort, der hat der Geist der Luge. Denn er tastet die paradoxe Herrlichkeit des Menschensohns an und ruttelt an den Fundamenten unseres ewigen Heils."xcvi Can we, therefore, so easily ignore the dogmas of the trinity and of the two natures, as Berkhof seems to, when referring to any biblical witness regarding Christ?xcvii A close connection is certainly made between the historical work of Christ and creation in the New Testament witness but could this not merely be an emphasis on the idea that He who was incarnated for our sake was He through whom the world was created? "The evangelists and apostles get somewhat lyrical in their tone when they speak about these things. A theologian is a bit calmer. At times he has the feeling that things blend too much in this lyricism. Especially when he reads Colossians 1. He thinks that he can say it with more precision than the apostle does here. He naturally holds that the apostle would agree with him on this. Must one not, asks the theologian, carefully respect the necessary distinction between the trinitarian and the christological way of speaking and eventually also between the ontological or cosmological and soteriological manner of speaking? Is everything that is said here about Jesus the Christ at the same time said about God the Son in human flesh?"xcviii In other words we cannot simply ignore the dogmas of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ as expressed in the Creeds of the Church. When we keep these dogmas in mind the meaning of the Scripture references to Christ's original relation to creation become clear. There is a difference between the mediation of creation and the mediation of redemption and neither of these refer to the essence of God. On the basis of his free counsel and good pleasure God decreed to create man. This decree was followed by the act of creation. As part of the eternal Trinity the Son of God was involved in this creation. He was the mediator of creation. Therefore this creation is precious to Him. With the fall sin, death and destruction entered this creation. But this creation is precious to Him, therefore He came to save it. His incarnation 66 was motivated purely by sin. Sin is rebellion against God. The fall did not occur so that Christ could be incarnated, rather God the Son took on human flesh in order to undo the effects of the fall. The incarnation is a reaction to sin. In this sense the incarnation is an emergency measure. This does not mean that the fall and the incarnation are not included in God's eternal decree. What it does mean is that they are included as moments in the eternal decree. Salvation in Christ is not the be-all and end-all of all reality. There is also sanctification - the working out of this salvation in history by the Holy Spirit. There is also the eschaton which will be a new act of God. 67 Notes for Chapter Two i. J. Bright The Kingdom of God 1953 Abingdon Press Pg 7. ii. Ex 15:18; 1 Kings 22:19; Is. 6:5; Ps. 47:3; 103:19. iii. Num. 23:21; Judges 8:23; 1 Sam. 8:7; 12:12; Ps. 48:3; Is. 41:21; Jer. 8:19; Micah 2:13. iv. H. Ridderbos The Coming of the Kingdom Pg 8. v. Luke 4:43; 8:1; 16:16. vi. Matt. 6:10; Jn. 11:24. vii. B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg 5. viii. The following summary is to be found in H. Ridderbos op. cit. Pg xi-xxxii which is also cited in B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 10-12. ix. cf. H. Ridderbos op. cit. Pg xxxii. x. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 15. xi. A.A. van Ruler quoted in B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 15. xii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 35. xiii. Ibid. xiv. Ibid Pg 38-40. xv. Ibid Pg 39. xvi. Ibid Pg 40. xvii. Ibid. xviii. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 35. xix. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg 59; cf B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 15. xx. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 34. xxi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 224 - The soteriological character of the kingdom as well as the difference in modality between the present and the future kingdom will be more fully discussed in chapter 3 Salvation and Glorification. 68 xxii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 72. xxiii. H. Ridderbos op. cit. Pg 8. xxiv. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 72. xxv. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 33. xxvi. Ibid Pg 34. xxvii. Ibid Pg 33-34. xxviii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 124;cf A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 38. xxix. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 124. xxx. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 34. xxxi. Ibid Pg 33. xxxii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 352-353. xxxiii. Ibid Pg 353. xxxiv. Ibid. xxxv. P. Tillich Systematic Theology I Pg 145-146. xxxvi. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 98. xxxvii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 125. xxxviii. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 38. xxxix. Ibid Pg 53. xl. Ibid. xli. This will be more fully discussed in the next chapter - Salvation and Glorification. xlii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 145; also B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 127. xliii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 127-128; also A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 146, 198. xliv. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 128. xlv. Ibid. xlvi. Because history spreads to the world from Israel (beginning with the missionary activity 69 of the Apostles), history unavoidably has an Israelitic character and a christianized culture is an incidental repetition of the nation Israel. This will be discussed in Chapter 4. xlvii. These are presented in Tillich Systematic Theology III Pg 396-397. xlviii. P. Tillich op. cit. Pg 396. xlix. In the introduction we quoted Moltmann's remark about the significance of the doctrine of the Messianic Intermezzo, ie: "Any eschatologically orientated and functionally developed christology comes 'at the end' to the question whether its mediator has not made himself superfluous. Its conceptions of the mediation and representative function of Christ are determined by what is decided in this 'last' question." (The Crucified God Pg. 257) In the first chapter we worked out the mediation and representative function implied by the doctrine of the messianic intermezzo. And now we are again seeing the significance of this doctrine because the idea that we have of the representative function of Christ (based on the doctrine of the messianic intermezzo) in turn determines our view of the significance of history. l. P. Tillich op. cit. Pg 397-398. li. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 169; cf Th.W. II Pg 231. lii. P. Tillich op. cit. Pg 414. liii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 225. liv. God's rejection is not arbitrary. lv. P. Tillich op. cit. Pg 399. lvi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 61 lvii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 229. lviii. We have already seen that this is not to be thought of individualistically, but includes the history that is influenced by these choices. lix. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 217; see also B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 131. lx. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. lxi. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. lxii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 132. lxiii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 170-171. lxiv. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 37. 70 lxv. Ibid. lxvi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W II Pg 227. lxvii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 157. lxviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 51. lxix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 157. lxx . This discussion is based on information from G.C. Berkouwer Divine Election Eerdmans, Michigan 1979 Pg 254-277; L. Berkhof Systematic Theology Banner of Truth, USA 1988 Pg 118-125; Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Baker Book House, USA 1978 Pg 146-149. lxxi. Riissen quoted in Heppe op. cit. Pg 146. lxxii. This discussion regarding the similarities of supra and infra is found in L. Berkhof op. cit. Pg 120-121. lxxiii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 91; Th.L. Haitjema in Dogmatiek als Apologie also agrees with the infralapsarian view. lxxiv. A.A. van Ruler De Zonde in het Besluit in Th.W. VI. lxxv. H. Hartwell The Theology of Karl Barth G. Duckworth and Co. London 1964 Pg 31. lxxvi. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg 34; cf B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 171. lxxvii. H. Bavinck in G.C. Berkouwer op. cit. Pg 259. lxxviii. G.C. Berkouwer op. cit. Pg 259, 264. lxxix. P. Tillich Systematic Theology I SCM Press 1988 Pg 263-264. lxxx. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 165. lxxxi. H. Hartwell op cit Pg 115. lxxxii. K. Barth Dogmatics in Outline SCM Press London 1988 Pg 58. lxxxiii. Jesus Christ's present and final relationship with 'all things' will be discussed in the next chapter. lxxxiv. H. Berkhof Christian Faith Eerdmans Michigan 1990 Pg 297. lxxxv. Ibid Pg 172. 71 lxxxvi. Ibid Pg 172-173. lxxxvii. Ibid. lxxxviii. Augustine City of God Penguin London 1984 Pg 1089. lxxxix. We have already discussed this in chapter 1 in connection with Moltmann. xc. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 162. xci. Ibid. xcii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 222. xciii. Ibid. xciv. H. Berhhof op. cit. Pg 172. xcv. O. Noordmans Herschepping Holland Amsterdam 1946 Pg 30. xcvi. E. Stauffer Theologie des Neuen Testaments C. Bertelsmann Verlag, Gutersloh, 1948, Pg. 234. "This is the twofold confession that John makes and in turn demands, a confession of the true divinity and the true humanity of Jesus Christ. Whoever fails to keep this double confession intact in both its clauses has the spirit of untruth in him. For he would be attacking the paradoxical glory of the Son of Man, and shaking the very foundations of our eternal salvation." New Testament Theology SCM London 1963 Pg 257. xcvii . K. Runia states that Berkhof's christology leaves no place for the ontological pre-existence of Christ; no place for the virgin birth; no place for a real incarnation; and no place for the dogma of the ontological trinity. If we accept Berkhof's christology we would, according to Runia, have to rewrite the creeds and hymns of the church, as well as the Bible itself! Runia states that, in his understanding of texts such as John 1, Colossians 1 and Hebrews 1, Berkhof rejects the pre-existence of Jesus Christ "zonder enige exegetische fundering." Runia also refers to G. Sevenster and M. de Jonge (New Testament scholars) who ask whether Berkhof has not come to this conclusion too quickly and too easily. De Godheid van Christus in Kerk en Theologie, 45ste Jaargang No. 1 January 1994 Pg. 5-20. W.D. Jonker (`n Eietydse Geloofsleer in Ned. Geref.Theologiese Tydskrif XVI (1975) Pg. 99-107) and C. Graafland (Nieuwe Bezinning op het Christelijk Geloof in Theologia Reformata XVII 1974 Pg. 86-105), state that Berkhof's christology leads to a form of adoptionism. xcviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 159. 72 Chapter 3 Salvation and Glorification. In this chapter we will look at Jesus Christ's relationship with the present and future, within the context of Van Ruler's theology. We have already seen what Jesus' once for all work consisted of (chapter 1) and the meaning of history as the putting into effect of this work (chapter 2). In this chapter we will continue this discussion by looking at the theological significance of the ascension as the concealment of salvation and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as a new act of God which puts Christ's work into effect in history. We will look at the relationship of Christ and the Holy Spirit as well as the relationship of both with the eschaton. The Resurrection and the Ascension. After Jesus had completed his work of reconciliation on the Cross he was resurrected from the dead. This resurrection was a new act of God in history - the revelation of the significance of the Cross. The resurrection of Christ is not merely a symbolic and therefore noetic verification of the significance of the Cross in the accomplished work of Christ, but an actual, divine activity which makes the immeasurable power of Christ's reconciling suffering and death an historical and effective reality.i The resurrection of Christ is the kernel of the gospel. "Het is de eigenlijke grote gebeurtenis uit de geschiedenis, waaraan de evangelisten en de apostelen in het geding, dat er gaande is tussen God en zijn wereld, getuigenis geven. Alleen en uitsluitend vanwege deze gebeurtenis zijn de apostelen de wereld ingetrokken, is de kerk onder de volkeren van de aarde ontstaan en zijn wij christenen."ii 78 Christ's resurrection has far-reaching consequences and is so important that without it our faith would be fruitless and vain and we would still be in our sins (1 Cor. 15:17), and there would be no resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. 15:18). Everything depends on the absolute historical character of Christ's resurrection.iii The fact of the bodily resurrection of Christ is clearly reflected in Scripture - his tomb was empty (Luke 24:3); he ate and drank with his disciples and they touched him (Luke 24:42-43;39). The whole mystery of the person of Jesus is also unveiled in his resurrection.iv He is revealed to be the Son of God in human flesh and the power and blessing of his work is revealed in the victory over death. The resurrection and the following forty days are a powerful confirmation of the person and work of Jesus but this was followed by another new act of God: the ascension. The ascension is part of the exaltation of Christ. Of course the Son had lived in heaven from eternity and thus the ascension does not refer to the Son in and for himself, but to the Son become flesh. The content of the proclamation of the ascension is that Christ reigns. The heaven which Christ has gone up to is to be understood as the place of the highest and loftiest glory of God. Christ ascended to the right hand of God. This indicates two things: firstly the height of majesty and glory, by which he is exalted by God and has received a name above every name (Phil. 2: 9-10) and secondly, the height of rule, which he exercises over all creatures, especially in the government and defence of the Church.v In order to gain a better understanding of the significance of the ascension to the right hand of the Father as indicating the fact that Christ reigns in the present, we will look at the concepts Van Ruler uses to describe this significance, namely separation, elevation, concealment, expectation and fulfilment. When Christ was crucified and buried his followers were scattered and frightened. This 79 would have been the end of the 'Christian' movement, but God raised him from the dead (or one could say he raised himself from the dead) and confirmed him as our Messiah. His followers received him with joy. Once again, however, he was taken away from them - in the ascension. Any direct access to Jesus was definitely and finally terminated by this. In a sense the ascension was even more decisive than the resurrection. This is seen especially in Luke. "Indeed for him it was the real turning point in history, the moment to which Jesus' ministry and indeed the resurrection itself led up, the climax for which they were the preparation."vi After the ascension the world had no direct contact with God but this does not mean that the ascension was not for our benefit. Jesus made the coming of the Comforter conditional on his ascension. Christ's departure was of greater benefit to us than his presence would be (cf. John 14:18-19; 16:14).vii Christ's separation from us is fruitful and full of blessing. His separation from us refers to his human nature and not his Spiritual presence. The advantages of Christ's ascension are as follows: "First, that He is our advocate in the presence of His Father in heaven (1 John 2:1; Rom 8:34); second, that we have our flesh in heaven as a sure pledge that He, as the Head, will also take us, His members, up to Himself (John 14:2;17: 24;20:17; Eph. 2:6); third, that He sends us His Spirit as an earnest (John 14:16; 16:7; Acts 2:33; 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5)."viii One can only speculate about what would have happened if the risen Christ remained on earth, but what form could his substitution, in our place, have taken if he had not ascended into heaven? This could only be answered with an unconditional affirmation of a radical theological theory of revolution. "God's intention of creating anew in Christ would have adopted the form of a radical nova creatio which implies a radical abolishment and replacement of the existing reality, not its redemption and preservation through an act of re-creatio. The ascension of Jesus proves God's deep respect for the freedom of our own will 80 and his irreversible love of the existing creation."ix Van Ruler's assertion that Reformed theology has justly emphasized the element of separation must be seen in the light of the above discussion. Berkouwer simply misinterprets Van Ruler's meaning when he denies this assertion on the basis of Christ's Spiritual presence.x Van Ruler does not deny Christ's presence in the Spirit, he merely emphasizes the significance of his bodily ascension. We have already seen that the ascension of Jesus is his exaltation to power and glory at the right hand of the Father, and thus that the content of the proclamation of the ascension is that Christ reigns. Christ reigns but we do not yet see everything in subjection to him (Heb. 2:8). This means that Christ's exaltation is not only assession to the throne - there is also an element of concealment. Christ's rule is still a rule in the midst of his enemies. The elevation is not the revelation. Our salvation is still concealed and this is a concealment in the flesh. Christ ascended in the flesh and rules in the flesh. The concealment of our salvation (the kingdom of Christ) in the elevation is the same as its concealment on the cross.xi Therefore Christ reigns in grace and mercy and not yet in majesty and glory. Christ is still our Priest, in fact, "He is so completely priest, that He became King."xii As priest he is king, and his reign from heaven is the service of reconciliation. His reign from heaven is and remains his reign from the cross.xiii Therefore we can say with Pascal that: Jesus sera en agonie jusqu a la fin du monde.xiv The ascension places us back in the situation of the cross and keeps the regnum Christi separate from the regnum Dei. The concealment of salvation in the present does not diminish its reality or fullness, but emphasizes its particularity. The kingdom of God is really present but it exists in its specific modality as the kingdom of Christ. In other words God's salvation is really present but it exists in the concealment of the flesh.xv Another aspect of the ascension is expectation. "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into 81 heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (Acts 1:11). In the present our salvation is concealed with Christ in heaven, but the Bible contains the certain expectation that he will return and that our salvation will be revealed. This indicates the intermezzo character of the regnum Christi. God's presence in Christ in the world is concealed, graceful and merciful - Christ rules for the sake of his enemies - God is present in the world in the particular structure of Christ. But this presence is not destined to be eternal. Christ will return in majesty and glory and every knee will bow and every tongue confess that he is Lord (Phil. 2:10-11). Salvation will no longer be concealed, God will no longer only be present in the special form of Christ, but will be all in all. "Kortom: dan is de messianiteit van Jesus ten einde. De hoogste daad, welke de messias doet is deze, dat hij ophoudt messias te zijn; het koninkrijk, dat hem verordineerd was (Luk 22:29), aan den Vader overgeeft (1 Cor. 5:24); opdat er niets insta tusschen God en de naakte existentie der dingen."xvi We will return to this idea later in this chapter. The aspects of separation, exaltation, concealment and expectation are contained in the idea of fulfilment which is "the most essential description of the soteriological fact of the ascension."xvii Christ ascended so that he might fill all things (Eph. 4:10), therefore he does fill all things and is all in all (Eph. 1:23). Christ lives through all things and is thus omni-present. Christ's presence is not, as in the Lutheran conception, a bodily presence but it is the power of his finished work. Reality has become messianic. Christ's power of reconciliation and redemption lives through all things. "De werkelijkheid is messiaansch geworden, geladen met het heil."xviii Therefore everything is meaningful because everything finds its meaning in Christ. The messianic power penetrates all things and reality is thus emptied of every demonic depth and burden. On the basis of this perfect but concealed salvation in the present, Scripture expects the return of Christ and the unveiling of this 82 salvation. The kingdom of God exists in the present in its modality as kingdom of Christ. In other words salvation is concealed in the flesh. Our complete salvation in Christ is distributed and applied to the world in the way and in the mode of the Spirit. The concealment of the regnum Christi is its presence in the Spirit. In the eschaton our salvation will no longer be concealed in the flesh or mediated by the Spirit - all particularity will fall away and God will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28). We will now move on to a discussion of the concealed presence of the kingdom of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. In chapter one we discussed the reformed view of reconciliation and saw that Christ's death on the cross satisfies God's justice. Christ's work was primarily a transaction between him and God. On Golgotha God was reconciled to the whole world, but this reconciliation must still be put into effect in the world. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurred as a new act of God so that Christ's sacrifice of reconciliation could receive structure in the present. Christ's power of reconciliation fulfils all things through the Holy Spirit. Reconciliation is a once-for-all act that occurred on Golgotha but that wants to be put into effect in every time and place, primarily in our justification and sanctification. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit reveals the salvation that we have received in Christ. Therefore there is a very close relationship between the glorified Christ and the Holy Spirit. The work of Christ is the continual background of the work of the Holy Spirit and through the Holy Spirit we are united to Christ. The Spirit cannot be separated from Christ. The Spirit is the Spirit of Christ! However the Spirit is not identical to the glorified Christ and his work is different to that 83 performed by Christ. The complete work of reconciliation was performed by Christ on the cross but this reconciliation needs to be mediated to us and we need to appropriate it. This mediation and appropriation cannot be understood christologically. Perhaps it does not sound too bad to talk of the Christ who proclaims himself but if we speak of the Christ who believes in himself it is clear that we are no longer within the bounds of christianity.xix It is us who believe - faith is the gift and the work of the Holy Spirit. In the present we experience salvation (that is we participate in the regnum Christi) in the mode of the Spirit. Since the ascension the only access to Christ is through the Spirit. This access must thus be understood pneumatologically, not christologically. In order to gain a correct understanding of the significance of the pneumatological mode of our participation in salvation we will begin by distinguishing the pneumatological from the christological point of view.xx In the first place the doctrine of the unio personalis sive hypostatica is decisive in christology - in Jesus Christ God (the Son) took on human flesh. But there can be no talk of anhypostasis and enhypostasis in pneumatology. The Spirit dwells in me but I am and I remain myself. In no way do I find my essence in God. The Holy Spirit dwells in humanity but it does not become man. From this we can see that in christology the concern is with human nature, which is taken on by the Logos and goes into the unity of his person. In this sense Jesus is a unique instance, a 'special creation'. The Spirit, however, dwells in ('moves' into) an already existing person. There is no nova creatio, the person is not replaced by the Spirit, but saved in the Spirit. Pneumatology is not concerned with human nature but with the already existing human person. A third structural difference is found in the ideas of substitution and reciprocity. Jesus Christ is and remains our substitute (extra nos). Everything the Messiah does (and is) he does (and 84 is) in our place and for our benefit. His whole being is a being in our place. In the Spirit, on the other hand we are completely included, in a theonomous reciprocity, in the appropriation and application of salvation. In this manner the intolerance that occurs when salvation is thought of exclusively christologically, is done away with. The fourth difference is found in the fact that Christ's work of reconciliation is to be understood in Anselm's terms as expiatio, placatio and satisfactio. This once-for-all work is put into effect by the Holy Spirit in reconciliatio (we are reconciled to God), sanctificatio and glorificatio. A fifth structural difference lies in the fact that Jesus Christ is a unique instance in history. He performed the once-for-all, sufficient work of reconciliation on Golgotha. Of course the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is also a once-and-for-all fact of salvation that took place in Palestine. However the outpouring of the Spirit has an 'unrepealableness of continuity'. The Spirit does not ascend as Jesus did but remains with us and gives us the 'courage to be'(Tillich). Time is fulfilled with salvation but not enclosed in Jesus Christ. The Church, church tradition and the historical process are divine realities but these cannot be understood christologically as a prolongation of the incarnation. Pneumatologically the concern is for us and for this world, that we express the image of God in our lives and experience this world as his kingdom. A sixth difference follows from this. The indwelling of the Spirit in us is essentially different to the unio personalis of the divine and human nature of Christ. God the Spirit dwells in us but we remain human creatures - there is no deification of the creature. The individuality of God and the individuality of man is respected. This dwelling of God the Spirit in us is more than God's creation immanence. It is the special dwelling of God with us and this indwelling must not be limited to the individual or to the church. In the course of the apostolic word 85 nations are included into God's covenant with Israel. The Spirit lives in the corpus Christi, in the corpus Christiani and in the corpus Christianum. A seventh difference lies in the fact that we are elected or rejected in Christ from eternity - this rests in God and outside of our personal freedom. However this is put into effect in our free choice - which is never a matter of all or nothing. The indwelling of the Spirit goes together essentially with struggle. The struggle of the Spirit with the flesh. This implies that the indwelling of the Spirit is temporary: If the essence of the indwelling is struggle then the indwelling of the Spirit must come to an end. The eighth difference is found in the categories of mixing and non-mixing. In christology there can be no mixing of the essence of God with the essence of man - this would lead to monophysitism. The work of the Holy Spirit however is characterized by the category of mixing. There is a mixing of the divine salvation in Jesus Christ with the created and fallen existence of man. This salvation in Christ is given form in us, but this form is different in every different culture, age and person. There is nothing absolute in this synthesis of redemption and creation. Therefore it also gives a principal foundation to the tolerance with which the church stands in the world. A final structural difference between christology and pneumatology is to be found in the idea of perfection. In christology one must speak perfectionistically - Christ is the sufficient Saviour - in him we are made whole and are no longer sinners. But in pneumatology perfectionism is a 'life threatening heresy'. the indwelling of the Spirit puts itself into effect in a bitter and deadly struggle with the flesh. In the Holy Spirit evil is not so much done away with as rediscovered. The cultic aspect of christianity is more important than the ethical. In the Spirit we realize we need a Messiah and that we are nothing but miserable sinners. But 86 we are not replaced by the Spirit, we are incorporated into the works of the Spirit. In a pneumatological context divine infallibility does not exclude the fallibility of man. The individual christian, the church and the christianized nation are divine realities but in the mode of the Spirit and therefore cannot be spoken of perfectionistically. We have seen that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is to be understood in the closest possible connection with the ascension and that Jesus Christ and the work of reconciliation accomplished by him on Golgotha is the continual background of the work of the Spirit. However when we consider the structural differences between the work of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit we see that the Spirit cannot be one-sidedly identified with the glorified Christ. The work of the Holy Spirit is continually concerned with the unveiling of the whole truth of reconciliation as it exists in Jesus Christ - as historical, divine reality. This reality must be proclaimed, preached and appropriated so as to give it structure in the present. xxi The salvation that has been attained, for us by Christ does not remain encapsulated within him. The Spirit takes this salvation out of him and proclaims it to us by including us in the body of Christ. Our salvation is the fact that we are included in the body of Christ in the mode of the Spirit. In this sense the Spirit is more inclusive than the Messiah. We are not only incorporated into the Messiah in the Spirit - we are also changed to his image. This image is the form of Jesus Christ and of his kingdom in us. " A deeper understanding of this shows that this is the form of the kingdom of God, as the kingdom of Christ is directed at the kingdom of God, and is even itself the kingdom of God in a determined modality. In and through the Spirit the kingdom of God is set up in us on the earth. The Spirit must be understood more from the eschatological kingdom of God than from 87 Jesus Christ."xxii The Spirit is an eschatological gift of God that occurs 'in the last days' (Acts 2:17) and can only be fully understood from the future of God. The Spirit proclaims the future, which he hears from the Father, to us (John 16:13-15). The Spirit and the gift of the Spirit is our relationship in the present with the world as it exists in the eschaton in God's original and final purpose. In other words the gift of the Spirit is our relationship in the present with the kingdom of God as it is present in and through Christ. xxiii The complete salvation which we have in Christ, and which will be revealed in the eschaton, is already reflected in the present in and through the work of the Spirit. "That is the full gloria dei: not in the first place his self justification as the just and merciful God who justifies us and wipes away our sin, but firstly his sanctification and glorification of us and the world, which is just as much our world as it is his."xxiv Christ's work of reconciliation took place only before the countenance of God but in the work of the Holy Spirit this salvation is put into effect in the world as justification, sanctification and glorification. Therefore Van Ruler uses the schema means and goal to express the difference between the work of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit. "In Christ all the fullness of God dwells bodily, he is our justification, he is the wisdom of God, but the concern is that we become dwelling places of God in the Spirit and become a God pleasing sacrifice so that the wisdom of God, that He laid in creation, shines again. Only then, by the work of the Spirit in us, does God come to rest, then He is where He wants to be, in the work of the mediator He is only on the way."xxv Of course this work of the Spirit is also only a provisional goal and a provisional rest. In the long run we ourselves are God's glory. The structure of the inhabitation of the Spirit indicates that the incarnation of the Son will be undone. In a sense we could say that the incarnation is already being undone in the work of the Holy Spirit - in any case its hard kernel, the substitution is affected in many ways.xxvi 88 The Holy Spirit and the Kingdom of Christ. The Spirit is our relationship with the future kingdom. Therefore he is the guarantee, the sign, the anointing, the paraclete, the Spirit of the portion and the promise. In all these aspects the Spirit is not only directed at Christ and the salvation in him. He is much more directed at the eternal kingdom and its glory. xxvii Of course the work of Christ is also directed at this kingdom, and this kingdom has received a firm foothold in this world because of his work. However we have already seen in chapter one that the work of Christ is a reaction to sin, death and guilt. Therefore Christ is related especially to guilt. In chapter two we saw that history is saved to the eschaton in as much as it is sanctified. But sanctification is the work of the Holy Spirit, therefore the Spirit has much more of a relation to creation than Christ does. We saw above how Van Ruler describes this relationship as means and (provisional) goal. From the structural differences between christology and pneumatology we can see why Van Ruler pleads for a relatively autonomous pneumatology. Berkouwer simply misrepresents Van Ruler's plea when he states: "Van Ruler rejects the viewpoint which considers the gift of the Spirit in connection with the Messiah."xxviii The work of Jesus Christ is the continual background of the work of the Holy Spirit, and the outpouring of the Spirit is to be understood in the closest possible connection with the ascension. It is Christ who is present in the outpoured Spirit. But the point is that Christ is present in the mode of the Spirit. The Spirit 'stamps' the present with the form of Christ. Christ is given form in the present, but this must be understood pneumatologically not christologically. We have already discussed this. Pneumatology is relatively autonomous because it cannot be derived from christology. We will now move on to a discussion of the realization of the kingdom of God in the present 89 as the kingdom of Christ (that is, in the mode of the Spirit). The elevated Christ is present in all things. All things are filled with the meaning and power of his saving work. This is a spiritual reality - a reality in and through the Holy Spirit, or in other words a reality that exists in the mode of the Spirit. Salvation goes into existence and is given form in the flesh. Salvation is not a substance or a 'something' that is added to our being. It is God himself in the special form of his revelation. Salvation is the unio mystica cum Christo. The Messiah, with the power and meaning of his saving work, goes into all reality - into the flesh - to reconcile guilt and to let existence stand up out of the destruction of sin, death and guilt.xxix The kingdom that is grounded in the reconciling work of the Messiah on the cross is worked out in the present by the Holy Spirit. The salvation that Christ obtained for us is present now, but in the mode of the Spirit. In other words our salvation is concealed in the flesh. The Spirit really establishes the kingdom of God in the present but not as a repetition of the reality of the incarnation or as the eschatological kingdom of glory. The kingdom is established in the present in all its completeness but in a determined manner, in the modality of promise. The kingdom of God is provisionally established by the Spirit, but this is not an initial realization of the eschatological kingdom. It is the essential provisionality of the regnum Christi as the concealment of salvation in the flesh. There is not a "confuse massa van realistische bevrijding, welke empirisch gekend wordt."xxx We do not partake in salvation in any obvious way. It must be appropriated and believed. Our salvation is hid with Christ in heaven, but we have the Holy Spirit in us and the Holy Spirit is the guarantee of our salvation. In the Spirit we participate in our salvation in the modality of promise. We have seen that we must not think of our salvation too narrowly - we are not saved from history but together with history - all reality is saved. The Spirit is not concerned only with individuals but with created reality as such. "De Geest heeft genoegzame breedte om alle 90 gestalten en momenten in een alles-relativerende veelheid te omvatten. En de Geest is een ontologisch - kritisch aanwezig - en bezig-zijn in alle empirische realiteit, waarbij alle andere kritische gezichtspunten eenvoudig verbleken." xxxi The mediation and appropriation of salvation, which is the work of the Holy Spirit, is just as multiform as the all-embracing presence of the Spirit. In the course of the apostolic Word new nations are incorporated into the covenant that was made with Israel by God and confirmed in the blood of Jesus. In this manner infants and states are included in salvation. It is illegitimate to say that only individuals partake in salvation by way of baptism. There is an endless variety of ways in which one partakes in salvation. For instance, in the manner of birth from christian parents and of the community in which one is born and brought up. The church, the corpus Christi, and the christianized culture, the corpus Christianum, are forms created by the Holy Spirit and media in the mediation of the eternal salvation in Christ. This mediation occurs in the manner of the individual. But just as much in the manner of the institutional, in the correctly structured life and in the church community with its institutions. In all these the concern is with actual, tangible historical realities which must be understood and lived in the manner of the Spirit. "Nothing is left as only earthly human, worldly reality. Is everything in existence not grasped by the Spirit? And can someone who is truly grasped by the Spirit not experience everything else as grasped by the Spirit? All existence becomes holy and lovely."xxxii The appropriation of Salvation by man. The (provisional) goal of the work of the Holy Spirit is that the salvation that is procured for us by Christ is appropriated by us. In the mediation of salvation God the Holy Spirit brings salvation to us in a multiplicity of ways so that we can partake in it. In the appropriation of 91 salvation we appropriate the salvation of God for ourselves in and through the Spirit, so that it can be completely our salvation.xxxiii This salvation which is mediated in a multiplicity of ways is appropriated in a similar multiplicity of ways. The communal, institutional and 'thing' elements of existence also participate in salvation. Reconciliation took place on the Cross of Golgotha and in the Holy Spirit man appropriates this reconciliation in justification and sanctification. But before man can personally appropriate this salvation he must realize the possibility and necessity of appropriating it. He must realize that he is guilty of transgressing the claim of God on his life. According to Paul one of the purposes of the law is to reveal the guilt of man. The law not only reveals sin and guilt but causes man to sin 'beyond measure' (cf. Rom. 7), so that sin does not only appear in consciousness as the knowledge of sin, but appears in reality as act and guilt. This is the negative meaning of the law, but the negative meaning cannot be separated from the positive meaning as the consciousness of guilt is an essential part of justification and sanctification. "Het negatieve, het doodende in de wet Gods, is tegelykertijd - dat is het wonder van de kracht Gods in den Christus door den Geest - het positieve, het levenschenkende."xxxiv At this point we can refer back to some ideas that we developed in the previous chapter. Revelation creates history and thus history receives the character of particularity and election. History is to be understood in terms of the example of Israel. The entire history of Israel can be understood, inter alia, as an unveiling of guilt. If the apostolic meaning of history is then understood as the incorporation of the nations of the earth into Israel (into the covenant that was made with Israel), then every christianized culture is to be understood as an incidental repetition of Israel and therefore partakes in the particularity and election character of revelation.xxxv In the christianized culture, as in Israel, guilt is brought to revelation. This revealing of sin is an essential moment in the christianization of the world. By this man 92 comes to the knowledge of the deepest seperation that exists between God and man, namely guilt. This knowledge of guilt is a knowing-with-God of what the problem of existence is. This discovery of sin is also a discovery of the possibility of being redeemed. "In being aware of sin I can see the light of redemption dawning in the distance." It is essential to have a knowledge of sin in order to gain a part in salvation in Christ. Therefore the knowledge of sin is a part of sanctification.xxxvi In this knowing-with-God about guilt and the possibility of salvation the autonomy of man is completely respected. Man is not overpowered but is freely convinced on the basis of his own insight about his sin and the necessity of a Saviour. In his autonomy man is convinced of the truth of salvation, man understands "dat hij (i.e. Jesus Christ) - als de middelaar - en zijn werk ten eerste noodzakelijk, ten tweede betamelijk, ten derde genoegzaam en ten vierde kostbaar zijn." xxxvii There is a theonomous reciprocity between man and God in the Spirit. Man agrees with God and in this is justified by God (the iustificatio Dei activa) and this is put into effect in the form and in the manner of the iustificatio Dei passiva. Man is justified and in this he sees that God is justified in what He does.xxxviii This reciprocity and autonomy is important, "want het gaat toch daarom, dat de mens in alle zaken van het heil en daarom van het rijk van God en daarom van de wereld met God mede-weet en mede-wil en mee-handelt, in een woord: mee-oordeelt." Nothing can be excepted from this. Salvation is directed at the kingdom and the affairs of the kingdom are the same as the affairs of this world. Therefore if one appropriates salvation it becomes clear what God in Christ wills and does with his world. In the Spirit man can actively persevere in life because he knows-with God that everything is going according to His good plan.xxxix "At every moment in time God is busy mediating his salvation to man, and to the human race, and every moment man is appropriating anew this salvation. Salvation is always receiving a new structure in reality." xl The appropriation of salvation is a dynamic process that has 93 individual, communal and institutional forms. In this appropriation all of life becomes, in all its structures, an expression of the image of God. The fragmentary synthesis of redemption and Creation. Christ performed his once-for-all work of reconciliation on the cross and thus saved all creation. But this salvation must be mediated to and appropriated by man. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. This salvation is added to man as the reconciliation of guilt, as the presence of the living God himself. There is a duality of existence and salvation. Salvation is added to fallen existence and mixed with it. This is to be understood from the doctrine of justification. Justification is the declaration of being just on the basis of the once-for-all work of Christ. Therefore all christianity is in essence name-christianity.xli Reality is not what it is in itself but what God says about it. With the appearance of the revelation of God in the world, existence is de-demonized and freed from its own character of being. It is filled with salvation and all creation is messianic. In other words all creation is broken into positive or negative signs of the coming kingdom. Creation is fulfilled with salvation and is therefore messianic, but this does not mean that in itself and as such reality is messianic in character. Reality becomes messianic by the prophetic judgement over it.xlii "Het koninkrijk poneert zichzelf kerugmatisch in de existentie."xliii Salvation in the present, in the modality of promise, is characterized by the tension that exists in the doctrine of justification. "In de waarheid van de rechtvaardiging ligt zoo sterk de eschatologische kracht van het spreken Gods en het ontologisch-kritische gehalte van het werk van den Heiligen Geest, dat in haar het voltooide heil compleet geponeerd wordt. En in de waarheid van de wedergeboorte gaat dit heil, deze eschatologische realiteit zoo zeer in de 94 existentie in en vereenigt en vermengt zich er dusdanig mee, dat de mensch, gegrepen door deze volkomenheid en er blijvend door geboeid, alleen maar in een duurzaam heen en weer, in het eeuwig wisselend spel zijner existentie, met haar worstelen kan."xliv Justification is to be understood as a synthetic, creative judgement of God. It is not an analytic judgement. In God's justifying judgement man and creation is what it is not in itself. In justification the guilt of man is reconciled. Justification is a moment in the appropriation of salvation and as such is a moment in sanctification. Justification also puts itself into effect in sanctification, which is the battle of the Spirit with the flesh. We are completely saved in Christ but this salvation is concealed in the flesh. We have salvation in the modality of promise. Our salvation has not yet been revealed to us but is safely stored away with Christ in heaven. Therefore our salvation is not empirically verifiable but requires faith. We have already seen that this salvation must be appropriated by us and this is a dynamic process in which we come to know-, will- and act-with God. We are not replaced with salvation, but our guilt is reconciled and our salvation is a continual battle of the Spirit (what we are proclaimed to be, by God, in Christ - ie. justified) with the flesh (what we are in ourselves - ie. sinners). The essence of our salvation in the present, that is, of the regnum Christi is the battle of the Spirit and the flesh. Therefore the regnum Christi is essentially fragmentary and ambiguous. Salvation is a miraculous act of God (wonderwerk van God) and through christianization reality is not what it is in itself, but is what God does with it. "Omdat de gratia interna zoo over de heele linie gratia irresistibilis, wonderwerk van den Geest is, en niet uitloopt in een toestand van den mensch, maar de mensch omgekeerd met zijn heele existentie is prijsgegiven aan het werken van den Geest, daarom is de gratia interna analytisch-empirisch ook nooit ten volle en in haar eigenlijke substantie nooit te conctanteeren. En alles wat er van 95 te constateeren is - in het hart, in het leven, in de prediking, in de sacrementen, in de politiek, in de cultuur -, is op een radikale en principieele wijze altijd volstrek dubieus."xlv Church and State.xlvi There is a duality of salvation and existence. Salvation comes to existence from the outside, as the reconciling presence of God. There is a synthesis of salvation and existence, but this salvation is concealed and although it is total it is not yet revealed and we experience salvation in the present in its modality of promise. Therefore there is never a complete synthesis of salvation and creation in the dispensation of the Spirit. Our salvation will only be revealed in the consummation and then there will be a complete synthesis of salvation and creation. In the present, however, there is a distinct duality of salvation and creation. This duality finds its most concrete expression in the duality of church and state. Salvation does not belong to the essence of this world. We are saved because of what God says about us. This salvation is concealed and needs to be mediated to us. The regnum Christi has a kerygmatic character. Our salvation needs to be revealed to us. This is the task of the church. The church is the bearer of the special revelation of God's saving presence in the world. The church does not exist for its own sake. It partakes in the officialness of the Messiah. Christ is the head of the church and the church is the body of Christ. The essence of the church is the apostolate. The church stands in the world with the gospel of the kingdom and goes out kerygmatically to the nations of the earth in order to baptise them in the name of the triune God and teach them to observe the law of God (Matt. 28:19).xlvii The church appears in the world with the special revelation that it has received from God. The church comes into being because of this revelation and is the vehicle of this revelation. The 96 church proclaims this revelation and through this all demonic powers are subjected to Christ and we learn, with joy, that we do not have our lives in ourselves but in the Messiah. We do not know this without the special revelation. The church proclaims this salvation and is therefore necessary in all its particularity - there is no true religion without the church. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.xlviii We have seen that the Gospel must not be understood in a gnostic sense as salvation from the world. Salvation is not to be thought of as the salvation of individual souls to another 'spiritual' realm. This is not what Van Ruler understands by the duality of salvation and creation.xlix Salvation is directed at this world and is exclusively concerned with this world. Salvation is to be understood as the reconciling presence of God. Through the work of Christ the guilt of all existence has been reconciled and in the work of the Holy Spirit this salvation is (fragmentarily and ambiguously) mediated to, and appropriated by, all reality. Salvation is directed at the whole world. In other words the church directs its message of salvation to the state. In order to appreciate the concept 'state' we must consider two elements that are contained within this concept. The first is the idea of the state as an institution, established by God. The second is the idea of a political, cultural and social community of man. These two elements cannot be isolated from one another. In society there are not only people, but also things, institutions, which are just as essential and important in society as people are l "These two: institute and community are so intertwined that no separation is possible."li Thus the state must be seen as a unity of community and institute. "Die staat is die samevatting van alle 'ding' - elemente, d.i. van alle institusionele elemente wat die menslike gemeenskap werklik tot 'n gemeenskap maak. In die politieke samelewing van die mense, is die woord 'staat' die 97 'harde kern'."lii But the state is not only concerned with the political shaping of society, it is concerned with society as such. The state is also concerned with the social and cultural problems of man. The political power of the state and the order that this imposes on society is certainly the centre around which everything revolves. Thus all questions regarding culture and community inevitably end up in the question of the state as the political ordering of the state determines, or at least influences, culture and community. Anyway it is clear that the state has a final and central position in the society of man as such. The life of man is influenced by the organization of the state. "Man cannot be understood unless he is understood as: citizen of the state, or better: as subject of the government."liii Therefore it is not possible to isolate state and society from each other. The nation groups itself around the government and the nation is to be found where the government exercises its authority. The nation is life organized around this kernel of authority.liv This authority must not be limited to the figure that traditionally appears in the constitutional law. All of national life is to be understood as a totality of 'circles' of authority. There is not only the relation of government and subject but also the relation of employer and employee. "Dit organisch gelede, corporatief gevormde, als gezagskring om de overheid gesmede volksleven is de vervulling van de existentie op aarde. De mensch is mensch-in gemeenschap."lv From the above we can say that the term 'state' refers to both the hard kernel and the encompassing totality of everything that is meant by the term 'world'. lvi Thus we are in a position to understand why the duality of salvation and creation finds its most concrete expression in the duality of church and state and why the church directs its message of salvation to the state. The whole of Van Ruler's theology finds its utmost concentration in this relation of church and state and it is the basic problem around which all his theocratic thought revolves. We 98 need only look at the titles of some of his major works to see this, eg. De Vervulling van de Wet - Een Dogmatische Studie over de Verhouding van Openbaring en Existentie and Religie en Politiek. Unfortunately we cannot go into more detail concerning Van Ruler's ideas of the duality of church and state. However it must be noted that the duality of church and state corresponds to the duality of salvation and existence. Therefore this duality is determined soteriologically and not metaphysically. In other words this duality is not an original duality in an eternal sense, but a duality that is posited by God's acts with this world.lvii "God is bezig met de wereld - dat is de staat. En daarvan heeft hij teekenen gegeven - dat is de kerk."lviii It must also be noted that although we have only given a brief outline of the duality of church and state, this dissertation, as a whole, is directed precisely at Van Ruler's understanding of the relationship of salvation and creation. Salvation in Christ is an emergency measure that came in because of sin. This salvation wants to be appropriated and expressed in the world. In the eschaton there will be a complete synthesis of creation and salvation. Then the particular form of salvation in Christ will fall away and God will be all in all. Mediation in Christ will no longer be necessary and there will only be creation as naked (redeemed) existence before the countenance of God. Kingdom and Covenant. In the previous chapter we discussed Van Ruler's understanding of the kingdom of God as the purpose of history. We also discussed the protological relationship of Jesus Christ with creation and rejected the supralapsarian view that the purpose of history is salvation in Christ. In the present chapter we have discussed the present relationship of Jesus Christ with 99 creation. The Spirit of Christ has been poured out on all existence, but the Spirit is not to be identified with the glorified Christ - He is also the Spirit of the Father. In other words the work of the Spirit is not only and not primarily concerned with reconciliation but rather with the expression of salvation in this world, that is, the work of the Holy Spirit is directed more at the kingdom of Glory than at Christ. Before we discuss the idea of the eschatological kingdom and the relationship of Jesus Christ to this kingdom we will briefly discuss and clarify the notions of the 'covenant' and 'kingdom'. The covenant is a moment in the special revelation - the election of Israel stands at the centre of the doctrine of the covenant. The covenant must thus always be thought of as a covenant of grace. The covenant is this: the living God associating with lost and sinful man.lix There can be no absolute distinction between the old and the new covenant. When God redeemed Israel from Egypt, He made them His own property and He gave them His law to preserve the salvation that they received in the redemption out of Egypt, and to express this salvation in their entire individual and social existence. This covenant of God with Israel, is not replaced with another covenant by the reconciling sacrifice of Christ. In the blood of Christ this covenant is renewed, confirmed and erected for all nations.lx The covenant is salvation in Christ. Thus there is almost an identity between the covenant and the regnum Christi. We have already discussed the characteristics of the regnum Christi and will not repeat them here. We only wish to emphasize the fact that election, the giving of the law, the covenant, the incarnation, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the special revelation are forced emergency measures of God. They can only be understood in connection with sin. The covenant is this: God associating with lost man. In the preceding pages of this chapter we have seen how this association is to be understood as the concealed union with Christ through the Holy Spirit. In the Covenant God himself has entered our fallen reality. The covenant is to 100 be understood in terms of the Immanuel - God with us.lxi However it is extremely important to recognize the difference between the covenant of grace and the eschatological kingdom of God. It is true that the kingdom of Christ cannot be separated from the kingdom of God either in terms of content or in a temporal sense.lxii There are not two different kingdoms but rather a difference in modality in one and the same kingdom. In Christ we have the full and complete salvation of God but in the modality of concealment in the flesh, in the modality of the indwelling of the Spirit, of the unio mystica cum Christo, of the promise. In the eschatological kingdom the promise will become reality, our salvation will be revealed. The concealment in the flesh, the humanity of God in Christ, will be undone in the eschatological act of revelation. There will no longer be mediation between the world and God - God will be all in all. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit will also cease - there will no longer be the struggle of the Spirit with the flesh. Having gone through the 'fire' of sin and grace man will move from the posse non peccare to the non posse peccare. All that will remain is the triune God and the naked existence of things. The regnum Dei is to be understood in terms of 'man before the countenance of God'.lxiii In the kingdom of Glory there is no union of human and divine nature such as that found in Christ. In the following pages we will clarify this eschatological border between the present fulfilment and the future consummation. But for the moment it is only necessary that we are aware of this difference between 'covenant' and 'kingdom'. Without the acknowledgement of this difference we would not be able to understand Van Ruler's theology. It is clear, for instance, that A. Konig has overlooked this distinction when he states: "If the world was created to be the place where the covenant was to be realized, then it was most certainly created with Jesus Christ in view...On this issue it seems unnecessary to play off Barth and Van Ruler the one against the other. According to Van Ruler, the purpose of creation is 101 creation itself, the joy of existing. But is this not already salvation?...And is this not precisely what will come about on the new earth? Yet this is the purpose of creation!"lxiv Konig has simply identified Barth's christomonic covenant theology with Van Ruler's trinitarian kingdom theology. It is precisely on this issue that it is necessary to distinguish between Barth and Van Ruler. The Goal of History. Van Ruler finds the purpose of history in the kingdom of Glory as the naked existence of all things before the countenence of God. But before we discuss this idea and explain what Van Ruler means by this we will briefly look at the line of thought which finds the purpose of history in the covenant. The covenant of grace is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Therefore those who say that the covenant of grace is the aim of creation, see Christ as the aim, or at least see the goal of history revealed in him. This can be understood in three ways: in terms of a christomonism, a nova creatio or a theory of elevation. The christomonic conception is the most literal understanding of the thesis that Christ is the purpose of history. We rejected this thesis in the previous chapter and considering what we have discussed in this chapter we can add the following objections: the work of the Spirit must be distinguished from the work of the Son and redemption cannot be dissolved into reconciliation - there is also sanctification and glorification. "Als men zegt, dat Christus de zin van de geschiedenis is, dan kan men dat alleen goed volhouden in een christomonistische theorie: Christus is over de hele linie het enige waar het om gaat."lxv In this context it does not make much difference whether one says 'God' or 'Christ'. Because with Christ one also 102 means God, who has gone up in his covenant relation with man. The thesis that Jesus Christ is our Eschatos only means that we can expect a totally new presence of God, of the Eschatos. The future expectation is thus directed exclusively on God but then man and the world is lost from view.lxvi In the nova creatio idea it is not so much God that is the Eschatos but rather a new act of God that is the eschaton. All our expectation of the future would be directed on the new world that God brings into being in the eschaton. In Jesus Christ, especially in his resurrection, this eschaton has already appeared in history. The resurrection is the great tower of light on the field of history. It is an indication of the eternal future and many other elements in the historical process, especially in the history of Israel, reflect this same light. But this is the only significance of history: this series of indications of the future. lxvii The entire purpose of creation and history lies in the new creation that has already broken through and been revealed in Christ. We can simply reject this nova creatio idea without more ado. In the first chapter on christology we saw that Christ died on the Cross to save this world. In the second chapter on eschatology we saw that history provides the totality of ingredients of the eschaton and that the eschaton is the summarizing of history to unity. In this chapter on pneumatology we have seen that the Spirit mediates and applies the reconciliation, procured by Christ, to this world. Everything points to the fact that it is this world that is saved - not replaced with another world. The elevation theory seeks the telos of man in some or other union of the divine and human nature in analogy to the unio personalis of Jesus Christ. Created reality is as such certainly good and completely God's work, but it is not yet the complete work of God. It must still be transsubstantiated and elevated. It must be taken into the higher order of grace. In this sense ordination or consecration must take place. The whole is structured hierarchically and 103 vertically. It is directed at the essence of God. Ultimately man must not live his own life - he must share in the trinitarian life of God.lxviii Roman Catholic theology consistently follows these lines but it is also found in Reformed theology.lxix In this understanding earthly life is the lowest rung in the doctrine of being. In Christ super-nature is added to creation. But this idea seems to be more in line with hellenistic, gnostic and neo-platonic understandings of reality.lxx In a pure Biblical-Reformed understanding christianity is eschatological and thus horizontal. We live horizontally, in time, before the countenance of God. In Reformed theology (as opposed to Roman Catholic theology) the elements of elevation, addition and synthesis are replaced with the elements of reconciliation of guilt, sanctification of created life and the goodness of creation.lxxi What, then, is the meaning of history and what is the relationship of Christ to this meaning? In no sense can we say that the purpose and goal of history is to be found in the person and work of Christ. However, it can be said that the purpose of history is confirmed in his person and work. "En dat zowel in deze betekenis, dat hij en zijn werk een grote beaming van Godswege zijn, dat er een zin van de geschiedenis is in deze betekenis, dat in en door hem en zijn werk deze zin en de bereiking van deze zin worden vastgemaakt. In Christus zijn alle beloften van God ja en amen."lxxii "In creation is God really concerned about grace, the covenant, salvation, or is he rather in salvation concerned about created reality, that it may stand before his presence?"lxxiii Christ, the covenant, salvation and grace are all reactions to sin, as such they have a secondary significance. God's presence in Christ is only a moment, an intermezzo, in the acts of God with this world. Of course it must be added that this is a decisive moment. Everything revolves around and depends on the person and work of Christ, but everything is directed at the realization of the kingdom.lxxiv 104 The purpose of created being is being itself. This can be expressed in different ways: the naked (redeemed) existence of things before the countenance of God; the joyful praise of God; that we live in the correct manner and that we live together. "Met andere woorden: de zin van het geschapen zijn ligt in het ethische, het sociale, het reflexieve, het verbale, het culturele en het liturgische."lxxv The kingdom of Glory consists of the joyful existence of man before the presence of God. The kingdom is the social ideal: the new earth on which true justice dwells. There is nothing outside and above the social ideal. The image of God is expressed in this: in man living together, along the lines of divine law, of justice and mercy and divine joy,lxxvi where 'holy to the Lord' is even inscribed on the bells of the horses (Zech 14:20). Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father. "Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 'For God has put all things in subjection under his feet'. But when it says, 'all things are put in subjection to him', it is plain that he is exepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one." (Cor. 15:24-28). All christian hope is directed at the eschatological kingdom of Glory, when our salvation is revealed and God is all in all. In the present our salvation is concealed in the flesh but in the eschaton this humanity of God in Christ will be undone. Then 'the Son' - that is, the Son as he has appeared in the flesh - will give the kingdom to the Father. That does not mean that he 105 will cease to rule but rather that he will, in a sense, transfer the lordship from his humanity to his glorious divinity. Christ no longer mediates between us and God in his humanity - the veil of flesh is removed. "Wij worden niet meer door onze zwakheid, welke de motiveering was van de vleeschwording des Woords, verhinderd in onzen toegang tot God; wij zien God in zijn klare majesteit regeeren."lxxvii This is identical to the view of J. Calvin on this issue. Calvin states: "Until he comes forth as judge of the world Christ will therefore reign, joining us to the Father as the measure of our weakness permits. But when as partakers in heavenly glory we shall see God as he is, Christ, having then discharged the office of Mediator, will cease to be the ambassador of his Father, and will be satisfied with that glory which he enjoyed before the creation of the world...To him was lordship committed by the Father, until such time as we should see his divine majesty face to face. Then he returns the lordship to his Father so that - far from diminishing his own majesty - it may shine all the more brightly. Then, also, God shall cease to be the Head of Christ, for Christ's own deity will shine of itself, although as yet it is covered by a veil."lxxviii The eternal Son of God, the second person of the Trinity took on human flesh in reaction to the fall of man, in reaction to the sin, death, guilt and reign of the demons caused by the fall. Christ died on the cross and the Spirit was poured out in order to undo that which had been caused by man. When this has been accomplished, and man has been restored to his proper being, salvation becomes superfluous. This does not mean that the eschaton is a return of the proton. The eschaton exhibits a 'plus' above the proton and this plus is to be found in the experience of sin and grace, in the experience of knowing, willing and acting with God through which man becomes 'fireproof' and moves from the posse non peccare to the non posse peccare. 106 Originally, before the fall, man was his own justification (the iustitia originalis is naturalis and not supranaturalis). The grace of the gospel consists of the iustificatio impii. Jesus Christ became our righteousness - this is the doctrine of the satisfactio vicaria. In the same sense he became the truth and the way vicariously. Thus Van Ruler asks "Should we not be our own righteousness - in our being and in our self, in our consciousness and in our acts? Are we not originally our own righteousness? And will we not finally be our own righteousness? Can the world not exist protologically and eschatologically in itself before God's countenance - so that it itself is his pleasure and glory?"lxxix In the eschaton there will be no mediation between God and man - God will be 'all in all'. There will be a complete synthesis of salvation and existence. This does not mean that we will be completely united with Christ but rather that salvation will 'fall away' because it has become superfluous. In the eschaton we will be transfigured and glorified - we will then be 'fireproof' and 'not able to sin'. The world will exist in itself, in its own righteousness before God's countenance. Then the iustificatio impii, which is still concealed in the flesh of Christ, will be completely ours. Christ 'only' has a substitutionary significance - but we are not replaced by him, he died for our sake to take away our guilt so that we could once again stand before the presence of God. In other words he became our righteousness so that his righteousness could become completely our righteousness. The incarnation of Christ was solely motivated by sin and the person and work of Christ are inseparable. Once sin has been done away with the incarnation is no longer necessary. Does it make any sense to say that the person of Christ continues once his work is completed? It makes a lot more sense to say that the veil of the flesh is undone; the Son ceases to be messiah; he only causes things to be saved so that in the joy of their existence they may praise God and the Lamb. It must be noted that the outpouring and indwelling of the Holy Spirit also 107 ceases. "As het eeuwige licht van het rijk der heerlijkheid over de gansche schepping opgaat, wordt de illuminatie van den Geest (in zijn uitstorting en inwoning!) gedoofd." lxxx In the kingdom of Glory man is no longer rebellious sinful flesh - he will be recreated and will contain the righteousness, truth and wisdom of God in himself and thus will not need the illumination of the Spirit. There will no longer be the struggle of the Spirit with the flesh which is the essence of the indwelling of the Spirit. The idea that Christ gives the kingdom to the Father - which is the undoing of the flesh - only means that the lordship is transferred from the humanity of Christ to his glorious divinity. It has nothing to do with subordinationism or some type of eschatological absorption of the Son by the Father. The thesis that Jesus Christ is an emergency measure relates to the incarnate Son not the eternal Son. Thus the doctrine of the Trinity is not affected by it.lxxxi At this point Berkouwer asks whether we can distinguish between the incarnated Son and the eternal Son and whether 'emergency measure' can really capture the sense of what the New Testament calls the great 'mystery of our religion (1 Tim. 3:16).lxxxii However, if we do not distinguish between the eternal Son and the incarnate Son we end up with Barth's supralapsarian view (which Berkouwer rejects) and the term 'emergency measure' merely emphasizes the infralapsarian point of view (which Berkouwer accepts).lxxxiii Christians in order to be men. The original and final intention of God is the kingdom of Glory understood as the naked existence of all creation before the triune God. Originally this plan could have been carried out through the covenant of works but man sinned. This necessitated the incarnation understood as expiatio, satisfactio and placatio. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit was also necessary for the mediation and appropriation of the salvation that was procured for us by 108 Christ. (There was also the election of Israel and the giving of the law - the entire covenant of grace). This was all necessitated by the fall. It is all an enormous detour undertaken by God to reach his goal. In the eschaton God will reach this goal. Then the particularity with which God has posited salvation in existence will fall away. This applies not only to the particularity of the incarnation of the Son, of the messiahship of Jesus and the particularity of the church with all its offices, preaching and sacraments; but to all the particularness of special revelation itself, the entire christological-pneumatological intermezzo, the entire dispensation of the gift of salvation and the appropriation of salvation.lxxxiv The fact that the present experience of salvation is a detour does not detract from the fact that the kingdom is really present now - but in a determined modality. The unveiling of this kingdom will be a new act of God and in no sense can we act as if this unveiling has already taken place. There is a distinct eschatological border between the regnum Christi and the regnum Dei. The social ideal is an eschatological prospect. In the present we get no further than the church and christianization. Guilt lies too deep in existence and society for it to be done away with all at once. It must first be reconciled - we must allow it to be reconciled. Before the social ideal there is the unio mystica cum Christo. lxxxv In the present God is struggling with the flesh and in christianization man and culture are stamped with the form of Christ. But there is never a complete synthesis of creation and redemption in this dispensation. "Wij moeten christenen blijven om uberhaupt een beetje mens te kunnen zijn."lxxxvi In the eschaton we will be what God intends us to be -true man and true woman, but in the present we only gain our true being fragmentarily and ambiguously in Christ through the Spirit.lxxxvii 109 Notes for Chapter Three i. G.C. Berkouwer The Work of Christ Eerdmans Michigan 1984 Pg 190. ii. A.A. van Ruler Ik Geloof Callenbach Pg 105; Van Ruler Obviously takes the resurrection seriously but in his magnum opus De Vervulling Van De Wet he glosses over it going from the crucifixion directly to the ascension - taking the resurrection for granted. This is also reflected in B. Engelbrecht's thesis on Van Ruler - Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Vision - the resurrection is hardly mentioned in the chapter on the Christological background. Van Ruler discusses the significance of the resurrection in his book: De Dood Wordt Overwonnen Callenbach - Nijkerk. iii. If the resurrection (and ascension) is understood as myth, the basis of christianity is lost. The death, resurrection and ascension of Christ must be understood as historical acts that effect our historical reality. On the other hand, the person and work of Jesus goes beyond our normal historical conceptions, therefore Van der Leeuw uses the term 'mythistory' when referring to the person and work of Jesus. See A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Pg 87. iv. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 107. v. J. H. Heidegger quoted in Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Baker Book House Michigan 1950 Pg 504. vi. G.W.H. Lampe God as Spirit 1977 Pg 71 quoted in B. Engelbrecht The Indwelling of the Holy Spirit Journal of theology for Southern Africa March 1980 no. 31. vii. See also Calvin Institutes II,XVI,14; Heidelberg Catechism Q. 46, 47 and 49. viii. Heidelberg Catechism A.49 (Van Ruler also refers to this - see V.W. Pg 104). ix. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 37. x. Berkouwer op. cit. Pg 213-215. xi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 91. xii. A.A. van Ruler Bijzonder en Algemeen Ambt Nijkerk 1952 Pg 17. xiii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 104. xiv. Ibid. xv. Ibid Pg 105; A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Nijkerk 1945 Pg 138-139. 110 xvi. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg 139. xvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 108. xviii. Ibid Pg 113. xix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 175. xx . This discussion of the structural differences between the pneumatological and the christological points of view is contained in Th.W. I Pg 175-190; see also Th.W. VI Pg 18-23; V.W. Pg 165-200. xxi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 16. xxii. Ibid Pg 19-20; when Van Ruler talks about the Holy Spirit taking everything out of Christ and applying it to us he is not saying that we only receive communion with the fruits and merits of the work of Christ. The person and work of Christ cannot be separated (see chapter one). There is also an insitio in Christum and a unio mystica cum Christo - and this must be respected in its full depth and reality - Th.W. VI Pg 20. xxiii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 24; see also Th.W. I Pg 189-190; Th.W. VI Pg 20; V.W. Pg 121. xxiv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 24. xxv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 190. xxvi. Ibid; see also Th.W. VI Pg 39-40, 25-26. xxvii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 189-190. xxviii. C.G. Berkouwer op. cit. Pg 217, 221. xxix. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 217. xxx. Ibid Pg 176. xxxi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 30. xxxii. Ibid Pg 29-32. xxxiii. Ibid Pg 33. xxxiv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 407; we will discuss the law more fully in the next chapter. xxxv. Ibid Pg 403. xxxvi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 57. 111 xxxvii. Ibid Pg 34-35. xxxviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 181. xxxix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 35. xl. Ibid Pg 35-36. xli. B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg 83. xlii. cf. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 230. xliii. Ibid Pg 241. xliv. Ibid Pg 247. xlv. Ibid Pg 252-253; cf. Die Fragmentariese en Tegenstrydige Karakter van die Inwoning en Werk van die Gees. - B. Engelbrecht in Koninkryk Kerk en Kosmos - P.F. Theron and J. Kinghord (ed) Pro-Christo Publications Bloemfontein 1989; A.A. van Ruler Verscheidenheden en Tegenstrijdigheden in de Realisering van het Heil in Th.W. IV Pg 84-101. xlvi. J.H.P. van Rooyen discusses Van Ruler's concept of the relationship of church and state, and compares it with A. Kuyper's view in Kerk en Staat 'n Vergelyking tussen Kuyper en Van Ruler Groningen 1964. xlvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 75; The purpose of the church is the mediation of salvation and in this the church is provisional but the church is also an end in itself. Salvation is appropriated in the church and is also celebrated in communion: cf. De Kerk is ook doel in Zichzelf in Verwachting en Voltooing Pg 53-66. xlviii. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg 252. xlix. See chapter 2. l. This also applies to the church which is not only made up of believers but also contains the institutionary elements of preaching, the sacraments and the office. li. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg 25; cf B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg 92-94. lii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 93. liii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 171. liv. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 93. lv. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 186-187. 112 lvi . B. Engelbrecht Die Tweeheid van Kerk en Staat Perskor 102-105. Johannesburg 1986 Pg lvii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 308-309. lviii. Ibid Pg 187. lix. B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg 183; cf L. Berkhof Systematic Theology Pg 272-283. lx. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg 183; L. Berkhof op. cit. Pg 290-301; This will be more fully discussed in the next chapter. lxi. A.A. van Ruler Gestaltwerdung Christi in der Welt Neukirchen 1956 Pg 35. lxii. See chapter 2. lxiii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. lxiv. A. Konig New and Greater Things Unisa Pretoria 1988 Pg 156. lxv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 74. lxvi. A. A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg. 220-222. lxvii. Ibid Pg 222-224. lxviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 171-172. lxix. A. Konig, for instance, states: "Nor need the proposition that the world was created with Jesus Christ in view be interpreted one-sidedly as having only a soteriological significance. Jesus Christ is more than Redeemer. He is Creator and creature as well. He is himself especially the realizing of the covenant. If the world was created to be the place where the covenant was to be realized, then it was most certainly created with Jesus Christ in view - in other words, with a view to establishing the relationship between God and man that was revealed in Jesus Christ, who was true God and true man in the most intimate communion." New and Greater Things Pg 156. The covenant of grace and Jesus Christ do not only have a redemptive significance - they are God's plan from the beginning. In fact Konig presents us with a bewildering array of contradictory ideas. He states: "Creation is God's own original plan; redemption is an intermediate stage, an emergency measure" (Pg. 147). "The purpose of human existence is to exist and to enjoy existence and the world" (Pg. 151). Here he refers to Van Ruler! Yet he refers to Barth and states: "Reconciliation is more than a reaction to faithlessness; it is the pursuit of God's original act, through which he intends to realize his goal, the covenant." The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology Eerdmans Michigan 1989 Pg 57. lxx. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg 172. 113 lxxi. B. Engelbrecht Natuur en Genade in die Theologie van A.A. Van Ruler in Kerk en Theologie Jaargang 32 No. 2. lxxii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 75. lxxiii. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Eerdmans Michigan 1971 Pg 67-68. lxxiv. A.A. van Ruler Ik Geloof Pg 112. lxxv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 77. lxxvi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 231-232. lxxvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 92-93. lxxviii. J. Calvin Institutes 2.14.3. There is some dispute regarding the interpretation of Calvin on this point. Berkouwer denies that Calvin means that Christ will lay aside his human nature The Return of Christ Pg 432. Velema and Rothuizen state that Calvin is not as clear as he could be on this point In Gesprek met Van Ruler Callenbach Nijkerk Pg 63. O. Weber states: "It is probably correct to interpret with Calvin that there will be a time in which we no longer must view God the Lord 'in the humanity of Christ'." Foundations of Dogmatics Eerdmans Michigan 1983 Pg 678. However he is also not unambiguously clear on this point. It seems to me that Calvin's functional christology implies the interpretation that Christ's humanity will be abolished; cf J. Moltmann who also interprets Calvin as saying that Christ's humanity will fall away The Crucified God Pg 257-259. lxxix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg 174. lxxx. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg 149. lxxxi. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament. Pg 69. lxxxii. G.C. Berkouwer The Return of Christ. Pg 431. lxxxiii. See G.C. Berkouwer Divine Election Pg 254-277. lxxxiv. B. Engelbrecht Teokratiese Stellingname en Frontverbreding -Kerk en Theologie Jaargang 27 No.1 January 1976 Pg 33. lxxxv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. II Pg 232-233. lxxxvi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg 39-40. lxxxvii. P. Tillich refers to this process of (re)gaining our true being as 'essentialization' - in which our existence is united with our essence. Systematic Theology Vol.3 Pg 406-422. 114 Chapter 4 The Relationship of the Israelitic Torah and Christian History. In this chapter the discussion will revolve around the importance of the Old Testament in Van Ruler's theology. In no sense must it be thought that this discussion of the significance of the Old Testament is an afterthought that has been 'added on' after our discussion of the messianic intermezzo. "The understanding and interpretation of the Old Testament are very closely correlated with the basic theological position." i Our understanding of the Old Testament decides our interpretation of the salvation given us in Jesus Christ, and in that connection our estimate of earthly and temporal life and of the whole structure of Christian existence. Our whole understanding of the kingdom of God, and therefore also of the catholicity of the Christian faith, the Christian church, and Christianity, is determined by the way we handle the Old Testament.ii The previous chapters have been significantly influenced by our interpretation of the Old Testamentiii and this chapter will not only give a basis to this Old Testament influence but will also provide more content and substance to the ideas (of salvation, sanctification and glorification) that have already been worked out. We will begin by looking at the Old Testament as such. This will be followed by a discussion of Christ's fulfilment of the Old Testament. On the basis of this fulfilment we will assess Van Ruler's idea that the Torah 'returns' completely in christian existence, not to the letter but really and genuinely as the material content of salvation in Christ. 122 The Old Testament and the Torah. The first issue that must be clarified is the significance and the place of the Law in the Old Testament. According to the traditional division the Old Testament is made up of the law, the prophets and the writings. However, if we look at the pentateuch we find that it contains not only law but also stories, songs and proverbs. Are we then to conclude that the Old Testament contains a part called the Torah which further contains, among other things, some articles of the law? According to Van Ruler we must reject this understanding and take into consideration the important difference between the Hebrew word torah and its Greek translation nomos. iv Nomos has the connotation of a formal and even immutable code of fixed laws. Torah, on the other hand, contains the meaning of an 'instruction' with all the flexibility and historical adaptability of a living instruction.v When we understand this idea that the Torah, the law of God, is instruction or in other words that the law is the whole of the "rechten en inzettingen des Heeren",vi it becomes clear that the Torah includes much more than only articles of law. The stories, songs and proverbs are also parts of the Torah as "zij wijzen ons ook van Godswege den weg in de verloren existentie."vii The Old Testament as a whole is a witness to God's struggle to express his will, his torah in the nation Israel. Therefore the entire Old Testament derives its meaning from the law.viii Therefore before we evaluate the significance of the Old Testament we must consider the question of the meaning of the law. 123 The Law of God. The law is God's revealed will and as such it is to be understood as torah, living historical instruction and not as nomos, eternal immutable law. In order to clarify this idea of the law as torah we must return to an idea that we developed in chapter two, namely that revelation and all reality is to be understood from the eschatological kingdom of God. "Vanuit zijn toekomst, waarin hij op ons toekomt vanuit het einde en de voleinding van alle dingen, dringt de levende God in ons heden op en breekt hij er in door en poneert hij zichzelf en zijn rijk in onze existentie."ix This implies that the Torah cannot be separated from the presence of God or from the eschatological kingdom of God. The law is the reconciling presence of God and this law is the law of the kingdom. If we combine these two ideas we could say that the law is the presence of the living God in history, a presence in which He Himself is dynamically involved in transforming this world into his image and reflecting his kingdom in it.x The Torah has an existential significance, it is to be understood as the presence of God.xi The Torah is not to be understood as a set of laws and commands that have to be lived up to in order to be acceptable to God. The actual and only content of the Torah is the presence of God. "En de tegenwoordigheid Gods wordt verstaan als zijn aanwezigheid en bezigheid in het vleesch. Haar centrum ligt weer in het heil, dat hij aanbrengt. Hij is reddend-uit de ijdelheid der verloren existentie - tegenwoordig."xii With his gracious revelation of his Torah God gave his gift of salvation to Israel. This gift of salvation is the presence of God himself. God the Redeemer and Saviour entered into the life of Israel, and not only into the life of Israel, but into the existence itself which is alienated from its Creator. The Torah is the reality of the redeemed life as it is realized in the praesentia realis of God the Redeemer. With the gift of 124 the Torah God revealed himself as the God who does not forsake the work of his hands (Ps 138:8) but enters into this fallen world in order to save it from eternal perdition.xiii The Torah is God's saving presence and as such its primary concern is not to spell out what man should do, but what God the Redeemer is doing in and to the world. Therefore the Torah also has a kerygmatic significance. God is present from his eschatological essence (or one could say that God is present for the sake of the realization of his eschatological intentions) and his revelation is the revelation of this eschatological essence. This means that the law of God is the law of the kingdom. The saving presence of God is the revelation that in the eschaton God will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28). There is a close relationship between the Torah and the kingdom - The Torah is the law of the kingdom.xiv This must also be understood in a dynamic sense as the law of the coming kingdom. The Torah is an historical reality, foreshadowing the coming kingdom of God, not the eschatological reality itself. It is the law of the kingdom of God in the modality of an historical struggle against the powers of the flesh.xv This eschatological significance of the law, namely that it is the revelation that in the eschaton God will be all in all, means that the law primarily contains a proclamation, a kerygma about the world which God himself will fulfil. The law is not given to man as a means whereby he can have a feeling of certainty because he knows how to win the favour of the divine; it is also not the ideal picture of the ordering and forming of redeemed life, it is life itself as it is given by God, the life that God wants man to participate in with Him, as a partner.xvi The Torah reveals that God himself has entered into history and is busy setting up his kingdom in this fallen existence. The Torah is an expression of the reality of the kingdom of God in this world. It is not a formal set of rules that must be lived up to in order to be acceptable to God. In its very essence it is the only true and the ultimate gospel of God for his world.xvii This is summarized in the definition of the law as the gift of God's grace. 125 The fact that God gave his law to Israel is inseparably bound up with the covenant of grace. One could even say that the giving of the law was the pinnacle of the realization of this covenant, and it must be remembered that throughout the Old Testament this covenant is seen as unearned and undeserved grace. Therefore the fulfilment of God's law is never to be understood as an achievement of man over against God. The law is to be understood exclusively from the love and grace of God. God's law shows man the way and creates for man the possibility of remaining in the covenant. "The law preserves the nation in the salvation that was received in the redemption out of Egypt, and expresses this salvation in the entire individual and social existence."xviii The law is a gift of God's grace and expresses the salvation that has already been received. The law is itself the expression of salvation and thus wants to be expressed in the totality of individual and social life, but before we pursue this important line of thought we must discuss the gift or, in other words, the historical revelatory character of the law. The law is God's revelation to man and this law is to be understood in terms of torah and not nomos. It is a living, dynamic, historical reality that cannot be abstracted from the presence and the acts of the living God. The law is historically determined but this does not mean that the mosaic law is now only an historical antiquity. It means that the law itself is historical, full of the dynamic structure of the acts of the living God. The dynamic structure of the law rests in the historical-eschatological essence of the acts of God. xix The law is historically determined because revelation is an historical act of God. In order to emphasize this historical and torah quality of the law Van Ruler defines the law as the medium between revelation and existence. Revelation is the most particular, it is the presence and work of God in and with existence. Existence is the most general. There must be a mediation between these two.xx The law is the historical expression of God's salvation and as such is the medium between 126 revelation and existence. But the law of God is nevertheless to be understood as revelation because "de openbaring brengt zelf het medium mee, om zich te vereenigen met de existentie."xxi As medium between revelation and existence the law finds its origin in the most particular, namely, in the presence of God. The law is not derived from the ethical rationality of man, it is not a formal authoritative body but is the presence of God himself and as such is a living, dynamic historical reality. The law is full of the dynamics of the works of God. Things are added to and taken away from the law. In the prophetic criticism the law can even be denied, but this is done out of respect for the law as the presence of God. As soon as the law is made to a formal instance and thus is used to exclude a person from the 'open reality' of God's commands the prophets (as well as Christ and the Apostles) criticize the law . Things are also added to the law, for instance, the baptism practised by John appears to simply be added to the law.xxii The qualities which have traditionally been ascribed to the Torah, namely its immutabilitas, perfectio, bonitas and spiritualitas, are to be understood in terms of the divine character of the law and not in terms of its formal nature. We saw in a previous chapter, that God's original and final intention is the establishment of his kingdom of glory. The Torah is immutable in the sense that it expresses this ultimate will of God and not in the sense of an inflexible and rigid rule which was imposed on Israel. Through all its historical changes the law remains the immutable will and law of God for this world. The perfection of the Torah is implicit in its immutability. The whole and only content of the Torah is the real presence of God himself, his righteousness and his redemption. Therefore the Torah does not contain the perfection which is demanded from man but the divine perfection which is given to him. The imperative that man must do the law flows from the indicative that the Torah is God's perfect gift to him. 127 The goodness of the Torah must also be understood in terms of God's goodness. The Torah is the reality of God's presence among his people. In his infinite goodness and grace God creates a living relationship between himself and man by entering into our lost existence in his Torah. In his goodness God is struggling to redeem this world and express his image in it. That is the goodness of the Torah. The spirituality of the law means that it is, and that it will forever remain the immutable, perfect, good and holy law of God. It is God's way of redeeming his world, he enters into fallen creation and creates history by setting an aim, an eschaton to history, which is his eternal kingdom of glory. The spirituality of the law means that ultimately it is not man who handles it in the realization of God's kingdom on earth. God himself is doing something with his Torah. He gave it to Israel and by this proclaimed in the historical existence of this people his kingdom of justice, peace and love.xxiii The law is the expression of God's will for this world and as such is a proclamation of the coming kingdom of glory. But the law is not only a proclamation, it also has a command character and is imposed on man for him to keep and do. We noted above that the law was given to preserve the nation Israel in the salvation that was received in the redemption out of Egypt, and to express this salvation. The intention of God's salvation is that it is expressed in the ordinary forms of existence. As medium between revelation and existence the intention of the law is to be expressed in the individual and communal life of man. Therefore God's law comes to us in the form of a command because in this form revelation enters completely into existence. In this way the entire active existence of man finds its place in God's acts because "de wet, als noodzakelijke vorm van het evangelie, geeft aan het evangelie ruimte in onze menschelijke ruimte en aan ons menschen in de ruimte van het evangelie."xxiv God gives his 128 law so that the people who do these things, will live by them (Rom. 10:15; Gal. 3:12; Lev. 18:5; Ezek. 20:11). God's works with man and the world cannot be understood in a fatalistic sense. With his saving works, God includes man as his co-worker and follower and "schept rondom den mensch de zedelijke en historische vrijheid, het veld der geschiedenis, waarop de mensch krachtens roeping met zijn taak in vrijheid bezig mag zijn." xxv The law appears within the context of the covenant of grace and provides the means of remaining within this covenant by expressing the salvation that has been received in the entire individual and social life of the nation. This indicates the totalitarian character of the law: "Zij omvat niet alleen den cultus van Jahwe, maar het heele leven; zij laat geen neutrale zone, al vervalt zij niet in casuistiek; zij wendt zich tot het geheele volk en beweegt zich ten volle in de gemeenschappelijkheid der existentie." xxvi This totalitarian character of the law must be understood in an extensive as well as an intensive sense. It is extensive in the sense that it wants to order the whole of life; and it is intensive in the sense that it wants to place all aspects of life, individual and communal, under the reign of God.xxvii God's law is the expression of his image and as such it is the law of his kingdom. The ultimate intention of the law is to go up into existence so that nothing is left except the triune God and the naked existence of things. This means that the law is more eschatological than the gospel. xxviii Bavinck expresses this by saying that the law is eternal and the gospel temporal.xxix This, in turn, means that the gospel was given for the sake of the law. The Son of God was incarnated and the Holy Spirit was poured out so that the righteousness of the law could be expressed in the totality of individual and social existence.xxx Not only can we say that the gospel was given for the sake of the law but we can also say that the gospel precedes the law. The law was given to preserve the nation Israel in the salvation that they had already received in the redemption from Egypt. The law is contained within the covenant of grace. 129 However, the Israelites forgot this gospel character of the law and took it into their own hands in order to justify themselves. Instead of remaining in the covenant of the living God and his plan for the world, Israel entered into a 'covenant with death' and an 'agreement with Sheol' (Isa. 28:15). They prescribed 'precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little' (Isa. 28:10,13) and the Lord became 'like an enemy' to Israel (Lam. 2:5).xxxi The law most certainly has a command character but we have seen that this command character gains its force from the gospel character of the law. As soon as this gospel character is forgotten or ignored the law becomes a formal set of rules to be lived up to in order to justify oneself.xxxii Thus man makes of God an enemy that has burdened his subjects with an unbearable system of laws and this 'enemy' can only be placated by man living up to these laws. This is sin 'beyond' the law and renders the law itself sinful. This is not sin against a specific law here and there, but against the law itself and the Lawgiver Himself by turning his greatest blessing into a fatal curse. The curse of the law is the curse with which we are cursing God by taking his law into our hands and treating him as an enemy to be placated and thereby bringing a curse upon ourselves.xxxiii But even when man takes the law of God into his own hands it does not cease to be the law of God. In this context the law reveals sin as man's hostility towards God. It exposes him as a sinner and plunges him into guilt. The law not only reveals sin but forces man deeper into sin (Rom. 6:20). This is the usus elenchticus or pedagogicus of the law - the law shows man what sin is, convicts him of sin and shows him his inability to meet the demands of the law. Thus the law acts as a pedagogue to Christ it brings us to our knees and shows us that we cannot earn salvation, we can only humbly accept it. The law, therefore, acts as the foundation of salvation in this world. We can only proclaim the kerygma of Jesus as the Christ in terms of the language of the Old Testament, the language of Canaan. The concepts of sin, guilt, reconciliation and messiah are israelitic 130 ones. They do not denote general, human concepts. Historically it was the nation Israel that was pushed and held in guilt by God, by means of his law. This re-occurs in the christianization of a culture. The mosaic law must be added in order to talk meaningfully of guilt and reconciliation. It creates the theological as well as the kerygmatic language. It creates the language of Canaan and without this we could not properly proclaim Jesus as the Messiah.xxxiv The law is a tutor that leads us to Christ - the law is the means and Christ the goal! However, this is not the original and final, the eschatological meaning of the law. This alteration enters the law because of man's sin. Eschatologically the law is not the means and Jesus Christ the goal; but precisely the other way around. Only historically, in the historical works of God, in his act of the fulfilment of the law, has it received this function of kerygma regarding Jesus the Christ. Eschatologically it is the law of the kingdom and therefore the concern is not with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit but with the kingdom, that is, with the expression of the image of God in the ordinary forms of existence. The law has become a pedagogue to Christ but we must never forget its eschatological nature, especially when it functions as medium between revelation and existence. "Wij hebben ook dan hardnekkig gericht te zijn op de gewone vormen van de existentie; niet op de kerk, maar op de wereld; niet op het sacrament, maar op het gewone leven; niet op de kerkelijke liturgie, maar op de bevinding en de cultuur; niet op de kerkorde, maar op de staat."xxxv Once the gospel character of the law has been understood it can be seen as giving complete expression to everything that God intends for this world in his works of salvation. There is a direct connection between the law and the kingdom. In this eschatological scope it is thus also more than medium between revelation and existence, it is also directly involved in the 131 eschatological reality itself. The fact that salvation will completely go up into existence (that is, that there will be no duality between the will of God and the inclinations of man or between existence and its redemption - there will only be existence as such before God) is already expressed in the law. The law of God is thus completely directed at the final glorification of existence. However, in the messianic-pneumatic situation of the present the law can only be understood as medium between revelation and existence. In other words, in the present dispensation salvation only goes into existence. "Er is in het genadige handelen Gods met de wereld een orde opgericht, tusschen het heil en de existentie, waarin zij voor elkaar bewaard worden. Door deze orde wordt in de chaotische existentie een ordening ingedreven, zoodat zij niet - voortijdig - te gronde gaat." xxxvi Here the law functions as medium between revelation and existence, its function is to preserve salvation and existence for each other by allowing salvation to go into existence (in the form of command) and erect a certain ordering of our chaotic and lost existence. This function of the law is expressed by the word sanctification. Thus the law is also the expression of salvation. This function of the law is summarized in the traditional doctrine of the triplex usus legis, especially in the usus didacticus or normativus, that is, the use of the law as a rule of life for believers, reminding them of their duties and leading them in the way of life and salvation; and the usus politicus or civilis, that is, the civil use of the law to temper sin and promote righteousness. The law is therefore not only a foundation of salvation but also the expression of salvation. However we must not over-emphasize this difference between foundation and expression. The knowledge of sin and guilt is a knowledge-with-God and as such is a part of sanctification. The distinction between these two functions of the law, namely as the foundation of, and as the expression of salvation in this world, can be clarified if we keep in mind the distinction between the messianic and pneumatic moments in salvation (as discussed in the previous 132 chapter). The law acts as a foundation for the salvation that is given in the person and work of the messiah. But when we consider the work of the Holy Spirit the function of the law as the expression of salvation comes to the foreground.xxxvii In a christological context the law has a kerygmatic significance but in a pneumatic context the law has a functional significance and this functional significance means that: "de wet wijst aan, welke functie in het geheel van het historisch-eschatologische handelen Gods de gestalten hebben, welke door den Heiligen Geest in de christelijke existentie geschapen worden. De sacramenten en de ambten, de bevindingen en de goede werken, de gekerstende cultuur en de theocratische staat zijn 'schaduwen der wet',welke langs de wanden der existentie vallen."xxxviii In its function of sanctification, the law erects shadows of the coming kingdom. This shadow-character of the law (Col. 2:17; Heb. 8:5; 10:1) is often misunderstood as a depreciation of the law, as if the law only exists to lead a person to Christ and has been abolished, in principle, for the believer by Christ.xxxix However when we read these passages in scripture that refer to this shadow-character of the law we see that the shadows are shadows of the future things (that is, the eschatological kingdom of God). This means that there is a direct relationship between the law and the kingdom of glory and therefore the shadow-character of the law must be understood from the perspective of the future of God. From the light of the future of God (the kingdom of glory) a shadow is cast on the Old Testament by Christ. In Christ the kingdom of God is bodily present (Christ as the autobasilia) and it is the shadow of this bodily presence of the kingdom that falls on the Old Testament. It is important to note that there is a clear distinction between Christ and the 'future things' in this image, because this excludes the idea that the gift of the law is only a shadow that must disappear when the reality, the gift of the Messiah, has come in its place. 133 Christ's fulfilment of the law does not mean that the reality has come in place of the shadows - that only occurs in the consummation. By the fulfilment body has been given to the shadows. Through this they receive substance and corporeality - they are made effective. In Christ all the promises of God are yea and amen. Christ himself, in his person and work is the truth of the law, the body, the substance and the content of the law. The shadow of what God is doing in Christ, that is, setting up his kingdom in the flesh, is already to be seen in the Old Testament. There is no qualitative difference between what He did in the Old Testament with His law and what He is doing with it in Christ - only a difference in degree. In the Old Testament God was also concerned with the setting up of the righteousness of his law in the flesh. However this was accomplished once and for all (for all time and for all people) in Christ. The salvation we receive in Christ is a shadow of the coming glory.xl The connection between this and what we have discussed in the previous chapters comes out very clearly here. There is an identity between the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of God. They are different modalities of one and the same kingdom. The kingdom of Christ is a shadow of the kingdom of God, it is the kingdom of God in shadow form. "De messiansche realiteit is niet het tegengestelde van de toekomst Gods, maar is de toekomst Gods zelf op een bepaalde wijze. Zoo is zij ook niet het tegengestelde van de schaduwen der wet, maar zij is er het lichaam, de gestalte, de substantie en de inhoud van.xli The Fulfilment of the Old Testament. The entire tone of the New Testament is determined by the idea that Jesus Christ has fulfilled the law and the prophets (Mat 5:17) as well as time (Mark 1:15; Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:10), the church (Eph. 1:22-23) and all things (Eph. 4:10). In our discussion of the shadow character of 134 the law we received a brief glimpse of the idea that the fulfilment of the law does not mean that it is abolished. At the beginning of the Gospel Jesus states: "I have not come to abolish the law or the prophets, but to fulfil them" (Mat. 5:17). From this it is clear that the word 'fulfilment' as it is used in the Bible is so completely the opposite of the idea of 'abolishment', that the fulfilment of the Old Testament and therefore of the law does not mean the abolishment of the law.xlii The concern of the remainder of this chapter will be to clarify the meaning and significance of this fulfilment. In our discussion of the Torah we saw that it must be understood as the saving presence of God himself. God's Word of revelation in the Old Testament was His indwelling and presence in the flesh. God the Son was the Mediator of Creation. Later, when God revealed himself to man, the Son was the mediator of revelation and as such was present (spirituali modo) in the flesh of man. This Word of revelation (who is the Eternal Word of God) became flesh in Christ.xliii "De oerwoorden Gods, welke God in de wereld heeft gesproken, en in het Oude Testament ons zijn bewaard en geschonken, deze zijn nu lichamelijk waar geworden."xliv The words that God spoke in the Old Testament have become bodily true in Jesus Christ. There is an identity between the law and Christ. The law has received its body and its head in Christ. This means that the law has been restored to its proper meaning. "Christ restored the law to its integrity, in that he freed and cleansed it when it had been obscured by the falsehoods and defiled by the leaven of the Pharisees."xlv This fulfilment by Christ brings the kerygmatic significance of the law to the foreground. Christ's fulfilment of the law is completely and exclusively an act of God. In Christ God himself (the Eternal Word) became flesh. God himself made Christ the Messiah and Christ's messiahship is his fulfilment of the law. Man was radically pushed aside. "De messias zelf is daad Gods, de daad der tegenwoodigheid Gods in het vleesch." xlvi Therefore Christ's 135 fulfilment of the law emphasises that the law describes in the first place what God himself does. God gives his salvation as a free gift. The Old Testament is filled with God's promise of salvation and this promise has been fulfilled in Christ. This does not mean that in Christ the promise of salvation has been replaced with the reality of salvation. That would be a confusion of the fulfilment with the consummation. We still experience God's salvation in the modality of promise. Christ's fulfilment of this promise means, firstly that the promise has fully come to power. Christ was completely obedient to God's law and it was fulfilled in him in that it was put into effect in Him. Therefore he was sent by God in the fullness of time, born of a woman and born under the law (Gal. 4:4). "Hij wordt onder de wet geplaast, omdat zij het heil uitbeelt, dat door hem gewrocht moet worden. Hij is de eigenlijke concentratie en het eigenlijke paradigma van en voor de gansche existentie in het heden."xlvii Christ placed himself under the total structure of God's dealings with his people Israel as this structure is described in the law and the prophets, and everything is paradigmatically put into effect in him. This means it took place once for all and thus "has decisive content; it took place with saving power. It is thus paradigmatic in the sense that, in him, it is fulfilled in his body and in the nations of the earth."xlviii This idea that the law has come to power must be seen within the context of the ideas of substitution, satisfaction and reconciliation. Christ's fulfilment of the law is completely an act of God. As our substitute Christ has taken the curse of the law on himself and reconciled God to us so that we may be reconciled to God and accept his law as a gift. This reconciliation occurred by Christ's satisfaction of God's law.xlix Reconciliation is the kernel of the fulfilment of the Old Testament and "only in the light of fulfilment here is it also fulfilled in respect of other questions."l This fulfilment must be seen as an historical necessity for the sake of the realization of God's original and final intentions. Jesus came exclusively for the law, so that the law could be 136 expressed in existence. But it must be remembered that historically a certain alteration has entered the law - the law acts as a pedagogue to Christ and the only legitimate obedience to the law is faith in Christ. This is the restoration of the kerygmatic significance of the law - but this is not the only significance of the law. In Christ we receive the law back, no longer wrapped in a curse, as the guide for a redeemed life. The law has been restored to power by Christ and this must be understood from the ascension. li Christ's satisfaction of the law is the kernel of his fulfilment of the Old Testament, but from the fact of the ascension we see that Christ's power of reconciliation and redemption lives through all things. All reality is emptied of every demonic depth and burden. It is made clear that the world and all reality does not have its own essence, its own character of being, in opposition to God. All things have their meaning outside themselves, in Christ. All things are set up as signs of the coming kingdom, signs that are filled with the saving power of Christ. All things are made into signs of the coming kingdom and this includes the Old Testament. The fact that God himself fulfils the Old Testament means that he has made it completely into a sign of his kingdom, for all nations and for all times.lii We will return to this 'sign' character of the Old Testament when we discuss the fulfilment by the Holy Spirit and the cultural-symbolical form of life created by revelation. In the second place, Christ's fulfilment of the promise of salvation means that this promise is now complete. With the coming of Jesus Christ all God's promises have now been given. This does not mean that a new promise has been added that the Old Testament did not know of. It is more the case that Jesus Christ is the concentration and summary of all the essential promises that were given in the Old Testament. This indicates that the New Testament (which finds its basis in Christ's fulfilment of the law) is an explanation of the Old Testament as well as a validation of it. "It was only in the Messiah and then in the Spirit that it became clear and 137 certain that the promises and the kingdom of God - the things that are at issue in the Old Testament - are not identical to the people of Israel. Israel is no less a means than Jesus Christ. God's concern in Israel is with the nations and the world."liii Christ, the evangelists and the apostles lived, thought and spoke in the sphere of Old Testament thought. They continually referred to the Old Testament, explained the Old Testament and argued from it. The Old Testament was the only Bible that the christians had for the whole of the first century A.D. In fact the Old Testament was the only canonical Bible for the first four centuries. "Men kan gerust zeggen, dat de gemeente van Christus restloos op den grondslag van het Oude Testament en van het Oude Testament alleen is opgebouwd."liv The New Testament is built on the foundation of the Old Testament and everything in the New Testament is taken directly, and sometimes in a radicalized way, from the Old Testament. In other words Christ's fulfilment of the law, as a concentration of the promise, is an explanation of the Old Testament. This explanation takes place in the New Testament as an exegesis and interpretation of the Old Testament. No doubt the Old Testament can be interpreted in many different ways but by its canonization of the New Testament, the christian church has accepted the New Testament as the only correct interpretation of the Old Testament. This explanation of the Old Testament is also to be understood in the sense of declaration and proclamation. The New Testament proclaims Jesus to be the Messiah. Jesus is proclaimed as the Messiah of the Old Testament, the Messiah of Israel and as such as the Saviour of the world. The New Testament proclaims that the Messiah has come and that his name is Jesus, that the Word of the Old Testament has become flesh. But we only know what the messiah is from the Old Testament. lv Here it must be repeated that Jesus Christ's fulfilment is a concentration of the promise and "that the Old Testament is fulfilled in Jesus Christ 138 especially in its central question, namely, that of guilt and expiation, of slaying and making alive, of love as the untroubled relation between the two - God and man."lvi Therefore the proclamation of Jesus as the Christ is an explanation of the Old Testament, or rather, it is an explanation and proclamation of the Old Testament. In other words the mosaic law is restored to its integrity by Christ and proclaimed as the law of God. This explanation of the law also means that the Old Testament has not been abolished or done away with but concluded. The New Testament does not abolish the Old Testament and replace it with a new doctrine, the apostles and evangelists did not write a new bible or a new set of ideas that have been added to the bible. "Men kan hoogstens zeggen, dat zij een, of liever de eenige uitleggen van den eigenlijken bijbel hebben toegevoegd. Men kan hoogstens zeggen dat zij een, of liever de eenige uitlegging van den eigenlijken bijbel hebben geschreven."lvii We have seen that, in the second place, Christ's fulfilment of the promise (of the Old Testament) means that this promise has become complete in the sense that all God's promises have been concentrated and summarized in Christ. We have also seen that this concentration and summary of the promises in Christ is an explanation and proclamation of the Old Testament and that this explanation and proclamation is, in turn, a validation of the Old Testament as the real and only Word of God. "Strictly speaking only the Old Testament is 'The Scripture', while the New Testament brings the good news that now the meaning of these writings, the import of all their words, their Lord and Fulfiller, has appeared incarnate."lviii In the third place, Christ's fulfilment of the promise of salvation means that it has become totally and completely promise. lix Before we continue to explain this third aspect of the fulfilment it must be noted that although these three aspects are discussed separately they must not be understood as absolutely different parts of the fulfilment - they are interlinked. The promise is fulfilled because it is made powerful and it is made powerful because it is 139 concentrated and explained and thus made completely to promise. These three aspects are thus intertwined with each other but they do not denote exactly the same thing - they do emphasize different aspects of the same fulfilment.lx This idea that the promise of salvation is seen in Christ to be totally and completely promise, is to be understood from the ascension - especially from the aspects of concealment and expectation.lxi Christ's rule is still a rule in the midst of his enemies. His ascension to the right hand of God is not the revelation of our salvation. Our salvation is still concealed and this is a concealment in the flesh. This indicates that Christ reigns in grace and mercy and not yet in majesty and glory. The concealment of salvation in the present emphasizes its particularity. Thus God's salvation is really present but it exists in the concealment of the flesh. In other words God's salvation is really present but it exists in the modality of promise. The Bible also contains the certain expectation that this salvation will be revealed - the law will be written on our hearts and thus the promise and command character of the law will fall away - and this indicates the intermezzo character of God's reign in Christ. Therefore all these characteristics of concealed, graceful and merciful, and particularity return us to the Old Testament situation. "Om het in a nutshell te zeggen, ligt dat daaraan, dat de hemelvaart het nieuwtestamentisch kerugma houdt binnen de grenzen van het Oude Testament."lxii Christ's paradigmatic fulfilment of the law means that this fulfilment took place with saving power. But this reconciliation took place extra nos. Christ's work was primarily a transaction between him and God. On Golgotha God was reconciled to the whole world, but this reconciliation is to be understood as a means to an end. This reconciliation wants to be put into effect in us. In other words this reconciliation must be mediated to us and appropriated 140 by us. lxiii This is the work of the Holy Spirit. The salvation that is described in the Old Testament became bodily present in the Messiah, and was given power and validated for all nations and all times and all places. Through the work of the Spirit this salvation is carried to all the nations of the earth and is expressed in history.lxiv The entire pneumatic spreading and expression of salvation lies already enclosed, in seed form, in the paradigmatic character of the messianic work of reconciliation.lxv We anticipated this idea when we said that the kernel of the fulfilment is to be found in the ideas of expiation, substitution and satisfaction. If we keep in mind what was discussed in chapter three regarding Christ and the Spirit, the relationship between their respective fulfilments of the law will be clear. This relationship can be expressed thus: the fulfilment of the law in the Messiah brings the kerygmatic significance of the law to the foreground, so that the law in its full extent is a proclamation of the salvation that we receive in the Messiah,lxvi while the fulfilment by the Spirit brings its functional significance to the fore. We could also say that the law is fulfilled in the Messiah as the foundation of salvation (extra nos) while it is fulfilled by the Spirit as the expression of salvation in the world.lxvii Therefore the work of the Spirit is sanctification . Sanctification is what the Spirit does in the world with the law and this can be expressed in two qualifications. The first is this, that He maintains the law as law of God and teaches man to let go of the law, so that the righteousness of the law can be fulfilled by God himself "in us who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (Rom. 8:4). This does not mean that the law is abolished for man, but in place of man holding onto the law and trying to justify himself, he is grasped and held fast by the law.lxviii Thus the Spirit fulfils the law in us, in the first place, by showing us that we simply have to accept the law in faith as God's Perfect gift of righteousness. The prophetic criticism of the law, in the Old as well as the New Testament, must also be understood in this context. This criticism of the law is a criticism of 141 man's use, or rather, of man's misuse of the law. The Spirit shows man his guilt and points him to Christ as his saviour. Thus the Spirit fulfils the law in man as the foundation of salvation by leading him to Christ.lxix The second qualification or aspect of the work of the Spirit with the law can be expressed thus: "De Heilige Geest schrijft realiter de wet Gods in de harten, in de existentie der menschen."lxx (Jer. 31:33; Ezek. 36:26; Heb. 8:10; 10:16). The Holy Spirit fulfils the law in man as the expression of salvation.lxxi This is an act of God and thus expresses the fact that sanctification is a gift of God - it is a synthetic and not an analytic judgement. The Spirit creates the christian existence in which only the doers of the law are justified. The Christian existence in which the law is really fulfilled is a real creation of the Spirit. "Zij kan misschien niet geconstateerd en geanalyseerd, gedemonstreed en bewezen worden, maar zij wordt - in de feitelijkheid der pneumatische daden Gods - geleefd."lxxii Sanctification is never to be understood in ontological terms. Sanctification is characterized by the category of mixing and puts itself into effect in the deadly struggle of the Spirit and the flesh. It is a symbolic expression of salvation. "De gansche existentie wordt door den Geest symbolisch en figuratief geleeft." lxxiii It must always be remembered that the work of the Holy Spirit is not the eschatological reality itself. The Spirit preserves the world for the redemption that it has received. The spiritual character of the work of the Holy Spirit means that His work does not consist of the introduction of a new being and new powers. It consists of the speaking out of the Word. Therefore the Spirit is called the Spirit of the promise, because it signifies that the work of the Spirit is a work of setting up signs, of the coming kingdom, in this world.lxxiv The specifically new in the New Testament is not to be found in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.lxxv Certainly the outpouring of the Spirit is an essentially new moment in God's saving acts, and it is the inauguration of the new covenant spoken of in Jer. 31. But the expression 142 'new covenant' must be understood within the context of the series of Covenants with Noah, Abraham and the nation Israel. It must not be understood in terms of an 'old', abolished covenant versus a 'new', different covenant. The new covenant is the new form of the covenant that was made with Noah, Abraham and Israel. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit is a renewal of the covenant. lxxvi The Holy Spirit is not the specifically new of the New Testament. In the Old Testament the Spirit was active in Israel, unveiling guilt and expressing salvation. "Het werk van den Geest is de kern van de oudtestamentische theocratie."lxxvii In our discussion of the work of the Spirit it must be kept in mind that this work is not limited to individuals but has an all embracing character.lxxviii Individuals are not saved from history, but together with history. The Spirit creates history. The kingdom is set up in the flesh and existence becomes historical. Therefore the doctrine of sanctification leads more directly to the doctrine of the apostolate than to the doctrine of the church.lxxix In the course of the apostolic word to the nations the Spirit and the law call forth the 'spiritual Israel' from out of the chaos of guilt. The cross is posited in the nation and in the nations, and this cannot occur without the entire Torah returning as the kerygma of the cross. The Word is directed at the nation, particularly at the government, and the nation becomes guilty. Thus the functional significance of the law comes to the fore and the nation experiences history as the permanent syntaxis of guilt and reconciliation. It must be remembered that this is the work of the Spirit and therefore the concept 'spiritual Israel' refers to the 'whole of Israel' (Rom. 11:26). It includes not only the church but also the christianized culture; not only the corpus Christi, but also the corpus christianum, "want de momenten volk en overheid, welke voor Israel zoo karakteristiek zijn, zijn ook in het geestelijke Israel ten volle aanwezig en constitutief."lxxx Thus the fulfilment of the law by the Spirit consists in His realization of christian existence - in the heart and in life, in the church and in the State, in culture and in 143 history - not as the eschatological reality itself, but as shadows of the coming kingdom, as a symbolic-figurative expression of salvation. This symbolic-figurative expression of salvation is described to us in the Old Testament as the "nationaal-symbolische levensvorm der openbaring."lxxxi However it is better to speak of a cultural-symbolical structure of life as created by revelation because this emphasises the fact that the Spirit does not limit himself to one specific national community but in the course of time (and in the course of the Apostolic Word to new nations) moves into new cultures and sets up shadows of the future kingdom. Thus far we have concentrated on the kerygmatic and functional meanings of the law and stated that the Old Testament is important because the fulfilment of the Old Testament promise does not mean that we no longer live in the dispensation of promise (as presented by the Old Testament). We have seen that the Old Testament is also important because the functional significance of the Torah returns in christianization - the Spirit creates history as the permanent syntaxis of guilt and reconciliation. But with this we have not yet seen the importance of the content of the Old Testament revelation and the concrete relevance this has for a christianized country. In other words we have not yet seen the specific relevance of the material content of the Old Testament for a christianized country. In the following section we will clarify this relationship between the symbolic structure of life in the nation Israel and the cultural-symbolic form of life created by christianization by discussing the significance and meaning of the content of the Old Testament revelation for a christian nation. The Importance of the Old Testament. According to Van Ruler "the Old Testament is and remains the true Bible. In it God has made known himself and the secret that he has with the world. All goodness and also all truth and 144 beauty -the fully redemptive knowledge of being - shines out before us in this book. It is the book of humanity."lxxxii This must be understood in terms of W. Vischer's thesis that the Old Testament tells us what the Christ is and the New Testament tells us who He is. lxxxiii In other words the New Testament tells us that there is salvation in Jesus and the Old Testament tells us what this salvation is. There is a dialectical relationship between the two testaments. The Old Testament is the legitimation of Jesus as the Christ and Jesus Christ is the foundation of everything that is at issue in the Old Testament. The Old Testament is the legitimation of Jesus as the Christ by showing that everything He does and everything that takes place in him is in harmony with the structure of God's relation to his people and his dealings with them. "In particular, when he makes the sacrifice of atonement, Jesus is in agreement with that upon which the Old Testament progressively focuses things."lxxxiv The Old Testament has received its foundation in Jesus Christ because all the promises of God are Yea and Amen in him. He is the substance of all the shadows and in his sacrifice the kingdom of God has acquired a firm place om earth.lxxxv This emphasises the fact that the church has one canon made up of the Old and New Testaments. The New Testament did not come in place of the Old, nor is it added to the Old as a second canon. The New Testament is simply added to the Old as a part of the one canon. The New Testament is the proclamation, interpretation, conclusion and validation of the Old Testament as the Word of God. Therefore Van Ruler understands the New Testament as an explanatory glossary that has been added at the end of the Old Testament. "Explanatory in the two fold sense of interpretation and validation, yet obviously also in the sense that this interpretation and endorsement of the canon is, for its part, also recognized as canon."lxxxvi The Old Testament cannot be proved to be revelation lxxxvii but the christian church has 145 accepted the Old Testament as Canon on the basis of faith and this faith is not arbitrary, it is supported by the authority of Jesus Christ, who proclaimed the fulfilment of the Old Testament in his person. Thus the church cannot believe in Jesus without also receiving the Old Testament. We have already seen the dialectical relation between the Old Testament and Jesus Christ. Although scholarship cannot prove the Old Testament to be the revealed Word of God it can tell us what this revelation is. "Theological scholarship can show phenomenologically that the structure of the biblical understanding of being is radically different from that of the nonbiblical understanding."lxxxviii Before we look at the material content of this revelation it is important to note this fact that the revelation (of the Old Testament) is radically different to paganism. By this confession that the God of the Old Testament, in the particularity of his revelation is also the God of the New Testament; that Jesus Christ is the Messiah of the Old Testament and therefore that the Old Testament testifies to the Messiah Jesus alone, the christian church has separated itself from paganism. "Het Oude Testament is de grens rondom de christelijke kerk, welke haar vrijwaart voor heidendom."lxxxix The christian church accepts the Old Testament in faith and thus recognizes it as revelation. Within this context it is the task of scholarly exegesis to get through to this revelation. xc According to Van Ruler this means that there must be "exegesis alone, exegesis 'without epithet', the kind of exegesis that is not an expert and more or less mysterious art..., it [also] means commitment to an exegesis without limits, for this is an exegesis that goes to the heart of what is at issue in the words."xci In other words exegesis must not replace the Word with its word and it must take into account the inner intentions of the primary author (God). We can clarify this by enlarging on these two ideas: In the first place the Reformation has always rejected the allegorical method of exegesis, and with good reason. The allegorical method 146 arbitrarily chooses a word or thought in an Old Testament text which, purely by association, contains Christ. This word is then used as the key to the text, which now appears to be full of Christ on the basis of this word. This implies that the Old Testament itself is allegorical by divine intention. Thus God really means something different to what he says. The historical relation of the Old Testament story to this earth is irrelevant and therefore the full reality of revelation itself, as a historical reality, is dissolved.xcii The scholarly, historico-critical and philological work of exegesis cannot move away from the literal to an allegorical sense of the words. God has expressed his innermost intentions in outer words and therefore the meaning must be found in the literal sense of the words.xciii But, and this is the second point, exegesis must also 'go to the heart of what is at issue in the words' and thus take into account the purpose, meaning and intention that is in 'the heart' of God. We have already seen that God expressed his innermost intentions in outer words but merely repeating and retelling the words and facts of the Bible does not express this inner intention or 'concealed, spiritual meaning' of Scripture. Thus scholarship is not enough. In order to properly understand Scripture "the most essential requisite is faith and life in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit."xciv True exegesis is only possible in and by the Holy Spirit and if exegesis "takes place by and in the Holy Spirit, [it] will make radical references to the letter and the literal sense."xcv There is also the question of the typological exegesis of the Old Testament. Typological exegesis seeks foreshadowings, analogies and parallels of later (New Testament) happenings in earlier (Old Testament) occurrences and this is not to be understood as mere recurrence. "Generally speaking types are things which impinge upon the senses, ordered by God, to represent to the mind by some similitude a thing of greater moment pertaining to religion."xcvi 147 Thus there is the element of the continuation and completion of God's dealings inasmuch as the words and acts of God are always greater and more complete. There is nothing wrong with this sort of typological exegesis but two things must be kept in mind. In the first place the Reformed rule that we are to treat as types only those things that God himself has shown to be such.xcvii If this is not kept in mind and typological connections are sought in every detail the same criticisms arise which we have discussed regarding allegorical exegesis. This leads to the second consideration, namely that the infralapsarian structure of revelation must be taken seriously. Jesus Christ is not 'the final end of all the ways of God' (K. Barth). Jesus Christ is an emergency measure that God postponed for as long as possible. This does not mean that there are no typological connections between Jesus Christ and the Old Testament it could not mean this considering that the entire Old Testament has been fulfilled in Christ. It also does not mean that the New Testament occurrences did not exist in the eternal council of God. What it does mean is that the a posteriori character of typological connections must be recognized. The Old Testament speaks about Jesus because it is fulfilled in him and not vice versa. Therefore the Old Testament is important, not because of everything that can be typologically related to Christ, but because everything in it is Yea and Amen in Him. "Jezus de Christus is geen Leseprinzip, doch Lesefrucht van de thora."xcviii The concern is not with Christ but with everything that is revealed in the Old Testament. With this we can, at last, consider the material content of Old Testament Revelation and what the significance of this revelation is. Old Testament revelation is not to be understood as the communication of teachings but as the "presence of God among his people in a series of acts, a series that forms an ongoing history illumined by the continually new word of promise."xcix The essence of Old Testament 148 revelation is the active, historical presence of God himself in Israel. We have seen (in chapter two) that revelation cannot be separated from history - revelation creates history. The Old Testament deals with history in the full sense since God and his speaking are the driving factors in it. Therefore the Old Testament revelation reminds us that God is concerned with history and the Old Testament historicizes the Gospel. "Only against the background and in the context of the Old Testament can it be maintained that Jesus Christ is an element in the history of God with Israel and consequently, as God's act an historical fact." c The Old Testament history of revelation is completely concerned with the earthly, concrete things of Israel: possession of the land, the gift of posterity, the increase of the people, an eternal monarchy, a society based on righteousness and love. The soteriological point of view is not in the foreground in the Old Testamentci but rather the acts of God in the establishment of his kingdom. The fall puts itself into effect in the history of Israel as a process of refusal and revolt. But God's purpose with Israel must not be exclusively understood in this negative light as if it served only to introduce sin and guilt and to bring them to light. "Israel and the Old Testament are at least to the same degree a mirror of the positive side. They reflect what the living God has in view for man and the world: his kingdom, his image, the law, theocracy."cii The Old Testament is more obviously concerned with the original and final element in God's intentions, with creation and the kingdom, than the New Testament is. Christ is the 'hinge' around which everything revolves and on which everything depends but he is not the concern. The concern is "with the image and the law, with sanctification and humanity, with ethos and culture, with society and marriage, with history and the state."ciii Considering that precisely these are at issue in the Old Testament, it (the Old Testament) is necessary to the church because it eschatolizes the Gospel. This conveys the fact that "originally and finally, and hence continually, our concern is with God himself and the world in the naked subsistence of 149 things."civ In other words the Old Testament tells the church what to do with the earth - it is to go out and sanctify the earth. The Old Testament is, therefore, necessary because it legitimately interprets the Gospel. In the light of the Old Testament we can clearly see that Christ's kingship is purely historical, secular, earthly, theocratic and political in intent. This interpretation also contains an element of supplementation because on the basis of the New Testament alone Christ's kingship as a kingship over the earth could be lost or spiritualized.cv The Old Testament not only gives expression to the salvation that we have received in Christ, it also provides the concepts to illustrate this salvation. This not only refers to the necessity of the rich world of the Old Testament imagery in preaching but especially to the fact that Christ (and the Spirit) can only be proclaimed in the 'language of Canaan'.cvi We have seen that the Old Testament revelation is essentially intertwined with concrete, historical and earthly facts - the history of Israel. Therefore any theory regarding the meaning and relevance of revelation is wrong if it does not include the national particularism of Israel (A. Kuyper). This applies not only to the Old Testament, but also to the New. The message of Jesus Christ is the message of the Messiah of Israel. But if this revelation is so absolutely chained to the history of Israel, how does this revelation come to us? There is certainly a leap in tradition when salvation is 'handed over' from the Jews into the hands of the Gentiles but this can only take place "under the great presupposition that in the Spirit there is an incidental repetition of Israel...Around Christ and by the Spirit we are appointed and made. For there is a corpus christianum as well as the corpus Christi (Rom. 9:24-29; 11:16-24). In addition to the church, we have the life and world that are to be sanctified and christianized. There is also theocracy."cvii 150 The New Testament tells us that there is salvation and the Old Testament tells us what that salvation is. Therefore the Torah not only describes the function of the structures created by the Spirit in christianization, it also describes these structures. In other words the content of the Torah also returns in a christianized nation. This is the material significance of the law. We have seen that from the Old Testament we not only know what Jesus Christ is, we also know what man, the cosmos, time and history is. All existence is covered by the Torah: marriage, sex, property, justice, punishment, the state, etc. Therefore if individual and communal life is to be christianized then the mosaic law must be applied and superimposed on this life.cviii This does not mean that the mosaic law returns to the letter. This law is to be understood in terms of torah and not nomos. It is a living, historical reality that is the presence of the living God himself, it is not a formal authority that must be lived up to. It is this Torah that returns in christian existence. Certainly, something has happened to this law by Christ's fulfilment - new commands have been added and this law has received a new form. cix The fulfilment of the law means a renewal of the law. But more essentially the fulfilment of the law means that it has received body, substance, content, reality and power.cx In his fulfilment of the law, Christ made it powerful and valid for all nations and all times. This means the entire Torah returns in christian existence but in a divine manner. Christ fulfilled the whole law but he is especially associated with the ceremonial aspect of the law. His sacrifice on Golgotha is the great ceremony at the centre of all christian life. "Christian life is fundamentally structured cultically, inasmuch as it stands in a circle around the great sacrificial work of God at Calvary, where the means of salvation become the fact of salvation, and the cultus became wholly history and history became wholly cultic."cxi Many other ceremonial aspects also return in christian life. Scripture, for instance, returns; Scripture is one of the most important ceremonial, institutional moments in christian existence - a 151 christianized nation without the Bible is as unimaginable as Israel without the Torah. The sacraments, the church and the sabbath (remembering the sabbath day and keeping it holy (Deut. 5:12) is one of the ceremonial components of the Ten Commandments) return in christian existence. "Niets is gelijk gebleven... Maar alles is wel - op goddelijke wijze identiek gebleven."cxii With the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, which expresses in us the salvation gained for us by Christ, the moral aspect of the law comes to the fore. This moral aspect cannot be 'freed' from Old Testament revelation nor from the cross of Christ. The 'good works' mentioned in the New Testament are taken directly or implicitly, sometimes in a radicalized way from the mosaic law. The good works were prepared by God beforehand (that is, revealed in his Torah), that we may walk in them (Eph. 2:10). cxiii These 'good works' must also be understood in the light of the cross. "Het christelijke ethos van de naastenliefde en de gerechtigheid vloeit voort uit den cultus van het offer van Jezus Christus."cxiv Many other elements from the Old Testament also return in christian existence. The promise returns - we still have salvation in the modality of promise in the New Testament. The Apostolic Word places the 'new' nations in the same position as Israel: called out from the nations of the earth and made to a blessing for all people. The flesh, time, man and the cosmos all return in christian existence and therefore the New Testament kerygma is kept within the borders of the Old Testament.cxv The civil use of the law also returns in christian existence and one of the most important tasks of the apostolate is the proclamation of the law to the government.cxvi Here the eschatological point of view comes to the fore. In its ultimate, eschatological, material realization there will be no duality between the law of God (salvation) and existence. There will only be existence as such before the countenance of God. This is why the law is eternal and the gospel 152 temporal. The promise and command character of the law will come to an end. This does not imply that the Torah will be superseded in the Kingdom of Glory. The Torah will, in all eternity, remain as the presence of God in existence but will no longer have the function of preserving us for the eschatological revelation of the salvation that we have already received. The proclaimed Gospel is inconceivable without this promise and command character of the law, which will fall away in the eschaton when the law is written on the heart of mankind (Jer. 31:33) and God is all in all (1Cor. 15:28). In other words Christ will hand the kingdom back to the Father (1Cor.15:24) and the messianic intermezzo will come to an end. Thus the promise and command character of the law share in the intermezzo character of the Christ. In the apostolic work of christianization the New Testament is not enough, it leaves us in the lurch in respect of life in society on earth and in time. Here, then, the Old Testament finds its importance in its "visionary faith in the possibility of the sanctification of the earth."cxvii The apostolic work of christianization takes place in a fierce aggression against the basic evil passions of pagan existence but it always ends in a synthesis of revelation and paganism and that is what we call christendom. "Theocratie is, praktisch en principieel, nooit meer dan het theocratische gehalte van een bepaalde situatie, en daarom volstrekt relatief."cxviii It must be remembered that christianization is not a process of world improvement, it is a process of spreading the cultural-symbolical life of revelation in which people are made guilty and saved. "En het wezen van de geschiedenis ligt in de onontwarbare verstrengeling van de schuld en de verzoening."cxix The last word in all of this is love. "Liefde tot alles wat de levende God op de aarde gesproken en gedaan heeft en daarom liefde tot de gansche werkelijkheid."cxx 153 Notes for Chapter Four i. L. Goppelt (Typos Pg. 4) quoted in A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament. Pg. 9. ii. A.A. van Ruler Ibid Pg. 10. iii. Either we understand salvation Israelitically or we understand it gnostically. Tertium non datur. It should be obvious that Van Rulers theology is influenced by a positive appreciation of the Old Testament. This appreciation has made itself felt throughout this dissertation. For instance, in chapter one we emphasised the work of Christ as the reconciliation of guilt. In chapter two we expressed a positive appreciation of history and in chapter three we affirmed the existence of this world. iv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 269. v. B. Engelbrecht The Law of Moses is the Law of God (unpublished article) Pg. 10; Van Ruler presents the following definitions of torah and nomos: "het woord thora vooral ziet op de handeling van het onderwijzen in den zin van het den weg wijzen, en dat het woord nomos vooral ziet op het bestand en de structuur van een harmonisch gelede werkelijkheid." V.W. Pg. 269. vi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 270. vii. Ibid. viii. "Ik herinner er aan... dat de thora niet in den pentateuch staat, maar dat de pentateuch de thora is...dat het woord thora ook aanduiding is van het heele Oude Testament." V.W. Pg. 476. ix. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 72; see Pg. 47-52 of this dissertation. We must also remember that revelation is not to be understood as information about 'divine things' which may or may not have saving consequences. Revelation is salvation which is the presence of God and God's presence must be understood in terms of his penetration into our reality from his eschatological essence. x. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 14. xi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 138. xii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 277. xiii. B. Engelbrecht The Ultimate Significance of the Torah in Journal of Theology for Southern Africa No. 61, December 1987 Pg. 46. xiv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 268. 154 xv. B. Engelbrecht The Law of Moses is the Law of God Pg. 12; We do not yet have the eschatological reality itself, at present we experience the kingdom of God in its modality as kingdom of Christ (see chapter 3). xvi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 286. xvii. B. Engelbrecht The Ultimate Significance of the Torah Pg. 46. xviii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 284-285; Later in this chapter we will expand upon the relationship of gospel and law. xix. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 476. xx. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 136. xxi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 278. xxii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg.280; In this sense we can talk about a continuous revelation in respect to the law but the idea of a continuous revelation can never refer to the gospel justification is a matter of all or nothing (Th.W. I Pg. 139). xxiii. This discussion of the qualities of the Torah is found in B. Engelbrecht The Ultimate Significance of the Torah Pg. 47-50, as well as in A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 468-471. xxiv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 293. xxv. Ibid Pg. 472; Th.W. I Pg. 142. xxvi. Ibid Pg. 285. xxvii. B. Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg. 215. xxviii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 271. xxix. H. Bavinck Gereformeerde Dogmatiek IV, J.H. Kok Kampen 1967 Pg. 435 - quoted in A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 473. xxx. This idea will be clarified when we discuss the fulfilment of the law. xxxi. cf. B. Engelbrecht The Ultimate Significance of the Torah Pg. 50. xxxii. Even the theologoumenon of the covenant of works understands justification (or grace) as preceding law (or sanctification, or glorification) in the sense that man contained his own justification before the fall. xxxiii. B. Engelbrecht The Law of Moses is the Law of God Pg. 7. 155 xxxiv. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 135. xxxv. Ibid Pg. 136-137. xxxvi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 270-272; B.Engelbrecht Agtergronde en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg. 217-218. xxxvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 268; Th.W. I Pg. 135-136. xxxviii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 500; cf. Th.W. I Pg. 140. xxxix. Here there is some difference between the Lutheran and Reformed positions. Although the Lutherans also accept the threefold use of the law they emphasize the usus pedagogicus. Lutheran theology reservedly admits the usus normativus, since they hold that believers are no longer under the law but this use of the law is still necessary only because and in so far as believers are still sinners and must be held in check by the law. In general Reformed theology does justice to the threefold use of the law: in its section on gratitude the Heidelberg Catechism devotes eleven Lord's Days to the law. Calvin also does justice to the threefold use of the law and emphasizes the usus normativus (Institutes II.8.) cf. L. Berkhof Systematic Theology Pg. 615. xl. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 287-291; Th.W. I Pg. 141; 220-222. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. xli. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 289. xlii. Ibid Pg. 301, 303. xliii . This is the ontological order: first mediation of creation, secondly mediation of revelation, thirdly mediation of redemption. Gnoseologically it is precisely the other way around. Of course revelation and redemption cannot be absolutely distinguished from one another but historically the mediation of revelation does precede the incarnation and revelation cannot be limited to Jesus Christ - there is also law (cf. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I 162-163). xliv. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 146. xlv. J. Calvin Institutes II, VIII, 7. xlvi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 486. xlvii. Ibid Pg. 485. xlviii. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament xlix. See chapter 1. l. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg. 71; cf. V.W. Pg. 489. 156 Pg. 70-71. li. See chapter 3 for a discussion of the soteriological significance of the ascension (and the resurrection). lii. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 140-141. liii. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Pg. 79. liv. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 124. lv. "The two main words of the Christian Confession 'Jesus is the Christ' - the personal name 'Jesus' and the vocational name 'Christ' - correspond to the two parts of the Holy Scriptures: the New and the Old Testament. The Old Testament tells us what the Christ is; the New, who He is." W. Vischer The Witness of the Old Testament to Christ Vol. I Lutterworth Press London 1949. Van Ruler discusses the New Testament as explanation, proclamation and conclusion of the Old Testament in Religie en Politiek Pg. 142. lvi. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament Pg. 71. lvii. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 125. lviii. W. Vischer op cit Pg. 7-8; The organic unity between the Testaments will be clarified later in this chapter. lix. Van Ruler distinguishes these three meanings of the fulfilment of the promise in Religie en Politiek Pg. 143-144. lx. This idea can be generalized and applied to much of Van Ruler's theology, eg: the person and work of Christ, the aspects of separation, exaltation, concealment and expectation in the ascension, the law as foundation and expression of salvation, the kerygmatic, existential, functional and material aspects of the law, the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of God, the fulfilment of the law by Christ and the fulfilment by the Holy Spirit, the appropriation of salvation and the expression of salvation, etc. In each of these examples the one aspect cannot be absolutely separated or absolutely identified with the other aspect. lxi. These are discussed in chapter 3. lxii. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg. 138. lxiii. See chapter 3 for a discussion of the relationship of the work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. lxiv. See chapter 2. lxv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 499. 157 lxvi. Ibid Pg. 495. lxvii. Ibid Pg. 499. lxviii. Ibid Pg. 503. lxix. See chapter 3 Pg. 96. lxx. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 507, 512. lxxi . It must be remembered that this distinction between the law as foundation and expression of salvation must not be over emphasized. lxxii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 512-513; B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 226. See chapter 3 for a discussion of the fragmentary and ambiguous nature of the regnum Christi. lxxiii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 518, 287. lxxiv. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 147-148, 137. lxxv. See chapter 2 Pg. 51 lxxvi. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg. 147. lxxvii. Ibid Pg. 137. lxxviii. It will be noticed by the reader that in this chapter we are returning to many of the ideas that we have already worked out in previous chapters. We ask the reader to keep these ideas in mind when reading this chapter as we cannot work these ideas out anew. Our present intention is to discuss the importance of the Old Testament, not to repeat ideas that have already been discussed. lxxix. The doctrine of the apostolate includes the doctrine of the church, the offices and the sacraments. "Maar zij omvat nog veel meer de leer van het ethos, de bevinding, de cultuur, de staat en de kolonie" A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 140-141; V.W. Pg. 517. See chapter 2 Pg. 58. lxxx. A.A. van Ruler Droom en Gestalte Pg. 121 quoted in B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 227. lxxxi. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 532. lxxxii. A.A. van Ruler The Christian Church and the Old Testament (referred to from now on as CCOT) Pg. 72. lxxxiii. See above endnote 55; A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 126. lxxxiv. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 75. 158 lxxxv. Ibid Pg. 78. lxxxvi. Ibid Pg. 94; Calvin also speaks of the New Testament as an appendix in the two-fold sense of exposition and ratification-Ibid. lxxxvii. "The ultimate and decisive things of life take place not in the sphere of reason and understanding but in the sphere of the heart and conscience. Why the message of the Old Testament...? The decision is one of faith or unbelief." A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 19. lxxxviii. Ibid Pg. 19-20. lxxxix. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 125; B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 227-228. xc. True exegesis is only possible by and in the Holy Spirit and therefore exegesis as a discipline of theological scholarship is only possible in the sphere of a christianized culture. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 62. xci. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg.22. xcii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 57-58. Criticisms of the allegorical method are also to be found in many other works eg. G.C. Berkouwer Holy Scripture Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan 1982 Pg. 105-138; W. Neil The Rediscovery of the Bible Hodder and Stoughton, London Pg. 101-111; Calvin Institutes 2.5.19, 4.17.15, 1.13.22, 3.4.4-5, 4.16.15-16, 4.16.31; O. Cullmann Christ and Time Philadelphia 1950 Pg. 131-138. xciii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 62; "The true meaning of Scripture expressions which exposition has to fix, can never be anything but a single, and generally speaking the proper, literal meaning, the sensus literalis, which is either the sensus literalis simplex or the sensus literalis compositus. As a rule the former must be adhered to. On the other hand the latter must be recognized, where in Scripture something is expounded as a type; and only where the literal sense would be at variance with the 'articles of faith' or the 'precepts of love', where, that is, Scripture itself demands another exposition of its words, is the 'figurative meaning' of it to be transmitted. Otherwise, in the application of Scripture passages to the very manifold circumstances of life, allegorical interpretation has its rights in the accommodatio ad usum." H. Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Pg. 38-39 (also Pg. 37). xciv. H. Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Pg. 39-40. xcv. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 61-62. xcvi. J.H. Heidegger quoted in H. Heppe op. cit. Pg. 403. xcvii. "Since Holy Scripture has no mere types, it is not enough for a type, that something should be found in Scripture; but that it should be pronounced a type in Scripture." J. H. Heidegger quoted in H. Heppe op. cit. Pg. 403; A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 65, 70; cf. note 93 above. 159 xcviii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 497; cf. Religie en Politiek Pg. 149 CCOT Pg. 62-73. cf. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 230. xcix. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 24. c. Ibid Pg. 86. ci. In the Old Testament there is already concentration from the nations to the nation and from the nation to the remnant and the Old Testament dimly perceives the meaning of this concentration in, for instance, the 'Suffering Servant' verses. In Christ, however, there is a tremendous concentration and therefore there is a one-sided concentration on guilt and its expiation in the New Testament. But even in the New Testament this is not the concern and the concentration becomes expansion - from the Messiah to the Spirit, from the Spirit to the conscience, from the conscience to the state, from the state to the cosmos. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 69. cii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg.29. ciii. Ibid Pg. 88. civ. Ibid. cv. We have already seen, earlier in this chapter, that the New Testament also interprets and supplements the Old. Therefore there is a dialectical, organic relationship between the two. cvi. The reasons why Christ can only be proclaimed in the expressions, concepts and insights of the Old Testament (the 'language of Canaan') have already been discussed earlier in this chapter. Van Ruler's discussion of the concepts of legitimation, foundation, interpretation, illustration, historicization and eschatologization is to be found in CCOT Pg. 75-91; cf. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 232-233. cvii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 29-34; cf. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 231-232. cviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 142-143. cix. This does not mean that the essence of the law has changed - only the form. This is possible because of the living historical character of the law. The Sermon on the Mount, for instance, is a radicalization of the law, the like of which is not to be found in the Old Testament in that form. That the law undergoes such changes is characteristic of its essence (not of its fulfilment). A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 519. cx. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 519. cxi. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 89; cf. Religie en Politiek Pg. 282. cxii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 527; cf. Religie en Politiek 160 Pg. 282. cxiii. B. Engelbrecht The Law of Moses is the Law of God Pg. 8. cxiv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 527. cxv. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 527-528; Religie en Politiek Pg. 138. cxvi. The state must be told by the church that its power is given to it by God. This frees the state from its demonic illusion that it is a god and reminds the state of its responsibility to God. The ceremonial, moral and civil aspects of the law are different aspects of the one law of God - which is the presence of God. cxvii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 91. cxviii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 533. cxix. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 143-144. cxx. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 535. 161 Conclusion The aim of this study has been accomplished. We have discussed Van Ruler's doctrine of the messianic intermezzo and we have seen the importance of the Old Testament within the context of this doctrine. However, it remains for us to conclude this study with a brief summary of Van Ruler's thought and the importance of this thought for modern day theological endeavour. We will do this by considering the three main foundations of this theology, namely the Trinity, predestination and the kingdom, and some of the criticisms that have been levelled against these foundation ideas. The Trinity In his book Intermezzo i Dr Pieter van Hoof characterizes Van Ruler's theology as patrocentric. Certainly Van Hoof presents many other criticisms of Van Ruler's work but his most basic criticism is that of patrocentrism. Thus he states: "zo kan men stellen, dat Van Ruler's theologie, die van de eerste tot de laatste letter mede gevoed werd door het verzet tegen Barth's christologische koncentratie....[maar] tegenover het christomonisme van Barth heeft Van Ruler de facto niets anders gestelt dan een patromonisme", and "het patrocentrische gezichtspunt,..., geldt naar onze mening voor de gehele theologie van Van Ruler."ii In order to do justice to this criticism we will present the basis of Van Hoof's objection before we decide whether it is justified. According to Van Hoof the whole of Van Ruler's theology is characterized by a patrocentrism. This is so because it is ultimately God the Father that stands in the foreground in all christological and pneumatological discussions. The eschatological is more than the 170 messianic. God only became flesh and the Spirit was only poured out for the sake of the eschatological kingdom. When this kingdom is realized there will only be God himself, the Father. In its protology and eschatology Van Ruler's theology emphasizes God the Father and the idea of a Trinity loses its significance. The idea of the Trinity is only applicable between the times of proton and eschaton.iii Thus Van Hoof's objection comes down to the idea that Van Ruler's theology is not trinitarian because Jesus Christ and the outpoured Spirit are intermezzo's which cease to exist in the eschaton. However it seems to me that Van Hoof has not taken into consideration the fact that there is a difference between the ontological Trinity and the economical Trinity. iv Certainly the doctrine of the immanent relation existing between the three persons in the ontological Trinity is based on what has been revealed concerning those relations in time. Thus H. Bavinck says: "The generation of the Son is the eternal arche-type of the incarnation of the Logos, and the procession from the Father and the Son is the proto-type of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit."v Following this Van Ruler asks: "Heeft de leer van de immanente triniteit niet een eigen zelfstandigheid, ook in haar betekenis voor de theologische methode?", and he answers: "God gaat toch niet op in zijn handelen met de wereld!... Deze vragen en meningen zijn misschien de diepste achtergrond van de hele aanzet en het hele ontwerp van een ten volle ontwikkelde trinitarische theologie."vi Van Ruler's theology does not claim to have a trinitarian structure simply because it discusses God the Father, who is especially associated with creation, Jesus Christ, the redeemer and the Holy Spirit of sanctification. His theology has a trinitarian structure because he considers creation, redemption and sanctification against the background of the ontological and the economical trinity. Opera ad intra trinitatis sunt divisa. Therefore the different points of view (of creation, redemption and sanctification) must be kept seperate from each other. However 171 the opera ad extra sunt indivisa. "Maar dat betekent niet dat zij werken Gods zijn naar slechts een zijnswijze (persona), maar juist dat zij de werken zijn van de volle trinitarische God naar zijn drie zijnswijzen. Daarom zal men elk van zijn werken naar buiten moeten zien onder de drie verschillende gezichtspunten van de Vader, de Zoon en de Geest en daarbij de dubbele denkbeweging moeten maken van het wederkerig op-elkaar-betrekken en van het principieel uit-elkaar-houden." vii Throughout this essay we have seen this structure in Van Ruler's thought, for example in the relationship between the christological and the pneumatological points of view.viii It is simply impossible to understand Van Ruler's thought if we do not see the ontological trinity as the metaphysical backround and basis for a correct interpretation of the economical trinity. This is what O. Noordmans meant when he wrote that the church introduced the dogma of the trinity to keep the confession of Christ pure.ix The ontological trinity is not only the background of the economical trinity, it also helps us to understand the latter. There is a direct relationship between the two, but they must not be identified with each other.x Thus Van Ruler can say that in the eschaton "nothing will remain other than the triune God and all things in their naked (redeemed) existence."xi This is perfectly clear when we realize that there is a distinction between Jesus Christ and the second person of the trinity (the eternal Son of God) on the one hand, and between the outpoured Holy Spirit and the third person of the trinity on the other hand. The eternal Son of God took on human flesh in the incarnation in order to fulfil the function of saving us and the third person of the trinity was poured out in order to express this salvation in us, but once this function has been accomplished they will return to their eternal places in the trinity. Then their will be no mediation between God and man but only the triune God (as He has existed eternally) and the naked existence of things. The incarnation does not constitute the abiding structure of reality. Man (and the world) do not become deified. The distinction between Creator and creature 172 must be respected. The doctrine of the trinity is important for three reasons: in the first place it reveals God to us as the truly Living One. The doctrine of the trinity maintains God's distinct existence, on the one hand, and his fullness of essence, on the other. "Once we have accepted the trinity we begin to understand that even apart from the universe and entirely in and by himself God is the independent, omniscient, and all-benevolent One, love, holiness, and glory." xii This doctrine protects the church from all forms of Arianism and Sabellianism. The doctrine of the trinity is also important for our understanding of creation. Only on the basis of the confession of the triune God can the distinction between God and the universe be maintained over against pantheism and panentheism. As soon as the economical trinity is torn loose from its metaphysical basis creation becomes a manifestation of the self-developing God. xiii We see this danger in those theologies that follow K.Barth in asserting that the covenant is the purpose of creation. This, however, brings the elements of necessity, development of God, and pantheism into the doctrine of creation, as Christ's mediation of redemption and therefore his mediation of creation refers to his essence.xiv Moltmann goes even further in this direction and states: "the Trinity is no self-contained group in heaven, but an eschatological process open for man on earth, which stems from the cross of Christ."xv His theology clearly emerges with a panentheistic conception of God.xvi God is a living God and the doctrine of his fullness of being excludes any form of pantheism. The idea of the imminent trinitarian relations (ie. God as a living God) also excludes any form of deism. God is able to impart himself: in an absolute sense to the Son and to the Spirit, in a relative sense also to the creature. The divine self-communication within the essence of God is the archetype of God's work in creation. Generation and procession within the being of God are the immanent deeds of God which make the outward work of creation and revelation 173 possible.xvii The economical trinity is not to be identified with the ontological trinity, but neither must the two be separated from each other - the former rests in the latter and can only be understood correctly against the background of the latter.xviii This leads to the third significance of this doctrine. "whenever any one rejects God's tri-unity, he destroys the very foundation of Christian belief, and casts aside all of special revelation. The doctrine of the trinity is the sum and substance of Christian faith, the root of all dogmas, the essence of the new covenant."xix Therefore Van Ruler states: "Deze formule heeft de kerk niet gesmeed, toen zij bezig was in de hete smidse van haar dogmavorming. Zij stamt uit de alleroudste traditie van de christenheid. Zij komt rechstreeks uit de evangelien, het allermeest uit dat van Johannes."xx A denial of this dogma has far reaching consequences - K. Barth states: "Inevitably -...- all anti-Trinitarianism falls into the dilemma of denying either the revelation of God or the unity of God."xxi God's revelation and his unity can only be accepted and understood on the basis of and against the background of his tri-unity as expressed in the traditional (orthodox) doctrine of the ontological trinity. Van Ruler has certainly taken this doctrine into accountxxii and his entire theology is worked out on this basis. In his criticism of Van Ruler, Van Hoof has not taken this doctrine into consideration and therefore has not understood his theology. Thus his criticism of patrocentrism (or patromonism) cannot be accepted as valid. Predestination and God's Eternal Decree. In Die Apostolaat van die Kerk J. van Wyk expresses the opinion that "enige grondige bespreking en kritiek van Van Ruler se hele sisteem by sy werklikheidsbegrip moet begin."xxiii According to Van Wyk, Van Ruler's claim of the complete identity of this world and the 174 future world, as well as his repeated emphasis of the fact that there is only one reality, namely this tangible and visible reality in which we live and with which God is concerned in his saving works, leads to the conclusion that the 'tangible' is simply raised to a theological fact. Thus Van Wyk states that Van Ruler's theology uncritically accepts empirical reality and therefore does not deal adequately with the final judgement and renewal that occurs at the 'end of time'. Van Wyk states: "Dit kom ons voor asof Van Ruler die skeppingswereld, die wesenlike wereld, te eenvoudig gelykstel met die sigbare wereld, waarin die kerk uiterlik beweeg."xxiv It is true that Van Ruler asserts that there is a complete identity between this world and the future world but he denies that this world has its own essence over and against God. "Deze bijbelsche leer van de schepping doet ons er oog voor krijgen, dat de categorie van het 'zijn' een heidensche categorie is, waaraan we in bekeering en wedergeboorte hebben af te sterven. Er is geen zijn der dingen. Er is alleen geschapen, d.i. gestelde en wel door het Woord gestelde, dus geroepen, en dat uit het niets geroepen werkelijkheid."xxv There is no 'essential' world, there is only this created, tangible world that has fallen under the curse of sin and which will have its salvation in Christ unveiled in the eschaton. This world returns in the eschaton, this world is resurrected in the eschaton.xxvi But first this world must die, it must be overcome by the forces of sin, death and destruction. These forces, however, do not have the final word. In a new act God will resurrect this world and destroy the powers of sin and death. Therefore there is a continuity between this world and the next - no nova creatio comes in the place of the old. This world is resurrected because God remains true to himself and to his creation. Thus this continuity does not lie in the object of salvation (this world), "maar in den handelen Gods, die trouw houdt aan zijn schepsel, ook als hij het aan den dood en aan het einde, ja aan het niets prijs geeft." xxvii Therefore this world goes through the radical 175 judgement of death and the radical renewal of resurrection in which sin and death is done away with. Once we have a correct understanding of the doctrine of the trinity we can understand the doctrine of the decrees of God. God is fullness of being and needs nothing outside of himself. Therefore his decree to create is absolutely free and based on his sovereignty and good pleasure. Certainly his decree refers to his essence but one could not say that his essence and his decree are exactly the same thing. Rather one must say that his decree is his essence in relation to his creation.xxviii Therefore God cannot be understood only in immanent trinitarian terms - these must be supplemented with the idea of predestination.xxix The Bible understands God as the God who works according to his eternal counsel and who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11). For this same reason creation is also to be understood only from the acts of Godxxx - creation is what God does with it. This is most certainly a rich source of comfort. "Want daardoor weten wij, dat geen blind toeval, geen donker noodlot, geen onredelijke en onzalige wil, geen onafwendbare natuurdwang de wereld en de menscheid beheerscht, maar dat het regiment over alle dingen berust in de handen van een almachtig God en een goedertieren Vader."xxxi The doctrine of predestination is also important because it maintains the distinction between Creator and creature. When understood according to the reformed confessions we clearly see this distinction as well as the centrality of the kingdom in the original and final intentions of God.xxxii With this, however, we are anticipating the next topic. The Kingdom and the Law. In this section we will consider the objections of H. Thielicke, J.J. Stamm, and Th. C. 176 Vriezen. We will present their objections together rather than answering each critic individually as their criticisms come down to the same thing. Thielicke absolutely rejects Van Ruler's theology and in his Theological Ethics Vol. II: Politics characterizes it as "an exact and consistent inversion of previous Christian tradition."xxxiii He attempts to prove this by presenting the following five points of criticism. In the first place, he states that Van Ruler's idea of Jesus Christ as a temporary and forced emergency measure for the sake of the sanctification of the earth, is a setting aside of New Testament eschatology and a revival of Old Testament Messianism. The New Testament thus ceases to be the canon within the biblical canon, the hermeneutical criterion for 'Moses and the prophets'. This leads, in the second place, to Van Ruler's inversion of the church-state relationship. According to the New Testament it is the law which 'comes in' (Rom. 5:20) or is 'added' (Gal 3:19) and therefore the state has only an interim significance. But Van Ruler applies this to the church and this reminds us of the way in which Richard Rothe speaks of the church being absorbed into the state once it has poured its christian powers into the state and thus 'sanctified' it for its eschatological function. Thirdly, whereas the New Testament sees history ending with the return of Christ, so that Christ is the goal of history and this earth is replaced by the new earth, Van Ruler draws upon the line of teaching in the Old Testament which has in view the perfecting of this present world. Van Ruler's idea of a theocracy over the sanctified earth knocks New Testament eschatology right off its hinges and fundamentally alters the relation between the Testaments. According to Thielicke, in the fourth place, Van Ruler's theology has received its decisive impulses from the fact that the New Testament proclamation of the eschaton includes the overthrow of this world and thus carries with it the temptation to be indifferent to this earth 177 and interested only in the hereafter. In his reaction to this Van Ruler does not make use of the true New Testament and Reformation connections between the indicative of reconciliation and the imperative of action in the world, between faith and works, eschatology and ethics, but rather makes the shaping of the world the theme of faith instead of a consequence and by-product of faith. Reconciliation is made into a mere means to an end, the New Testament becomes merely the servant of the Old Testament. Law and Gospel, Old Testament and New, are thus exchanged, the one for the other. In the fifth place, Thielicke objects to Van Ruler's claim that one of the ultimate goals of salvation history is the perfecting of humanity. Thielicke poses the following questions: what is this 'manhood' that our christianity is intended to serve? Is it a matter of developing the created manhood to full perfection? And what is this created manhood? Is it a matter of the ontically given form, the entelechy? Does perfection mean, then, the full and complete development of all the potentialities present in creation? Thielicke answers these questions negatively as man does not exist, in the Bible, as an ontically autonomous being, but only in his relation to God. He then continues with some 'corrections' of Van Ruler's concept of humanity: If our relation to God is determined by Christ, then one can not fully develop ones humanity until this fellowship is realized. By its very nature this communication with Christ cannot be a temporary thing which, once it is dissolved, leaves me capable of perfecting my humanity apart from him. It can only be an end in itself. The image which God has of men has taken form in the humanity of Jesus Christ. Any doctrine of the divine image is thus christologically determined. We only know that man is in the countenance of the humanity of Jesus Christ. To become a man is to share in this humanity of Jesus Christ. The telos of our being is union with the Father in Jesus Christ. To grow into humanity is to grow into Jesus Christ. Therefore our christianity cannot be understood as a means to an end, namely to be 178 human.xxxiv J.J. Stamm and Th. C. Vriezen have each written a review of Van Ruler's book The Christian Church and the Old Testament. After a brief summary of this work Stamm states that the christological exposition of the Old Testament cannot be pushed aside because of its hope of the kingdom which Van Ruler regards as more far reaching and greater than Jesus' work of reconciliation which is merely an emergency measure. "Can it be doubted that in creation God is really concerned with grace, covenant, and salvation?"xxxv According to Stamm the covenant is the purpose of creation and therefore Jesus Christ as the representative of the covenant, is the purpose of creation. Thus the Old Testament must be properly expounded in a christological manner according to its historical place in the history of salvation as preparation and foreshadowing of that which is to come, as a document pointing to the future, the promises of which are realized in Jesus and his church but are not yet finally consummated. Stamm finds the unity of the Old Testament in this, that all its promises point to the eschatological presence of God among his people. As these promises are realized in Christ it is not correct to say, as Van Ruler does, that there are promises in the Old Testament that do not refer directly to Christ. Stamm also states that Israel knew very well what substitution and atonement meant and therefore it is not correct to say that the idea of substitution only emerges finally in the New Testament.xxxvi In his Theocracy and Soteriologyxxxvii Vriezen also objects that Van Ruler finds theocracy to be the decisive fact of revelation in the Old Testament and that he ascribes an exclusively soteriological meaning to the New Testament. Vriezen charges Van Ruler with an overspiritualization of the New Testament and states that 179 it is no less theocratically orientated toward the kingdom of God than the Old Testament. Theocracy could only become a living reality in Israel through the cross , as in fact it can be realized in any way at all only through the cross. The Spirit is bound to Christ and the Lord (Christ) is the Spirit. Therefore it is inconceivable that Van Ruler can say that in the New Testament one cannot see a genuine 'confrontation' between God and his people. Jesus Christ, on his cross and in his resurrection, is the locus of the breaking through of the kingdom of God in the world. Therefore it is strange that Van Ruler hardly mentions the resurrection, in view of the fact that it affords the decisive solution in the New Testament message. Following this Vriezen states that Van Ruler does not distinguish between the concepts of theocracy and eschatology and therefore states that according to his characterization, the kingdom of God is too plainly visible in the Old Testament, as if no act of faith at all were necessary in Israel. Thus Van Ruler separates reconciliation from sanctification and goes too far when he calls sin and reconciliation 'a secondary problem, protologically and eschatologically'. This also leads to the danger of a repristination of Israel and of the Old Testament institutions. We have presented all these criticisms together, before providing an answer to them, because they all come down to the same thingxxxviii namely, the place creation, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit have in theology. From these criticisms and from the comments that are made in order to 'correct' Van Ruler's view we can see that Thielicke, Stamm and Vriezen have an entirely different understanding of the structure of christian theology. Briefly, it is clear that all three critics see Jesus Christ as the aim and purpose of creation. Therefore they understand Jesus as the Leseprinzip of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is that which is promised in the 180 Old Testament and these promises have been realized in the incarnation but have not yet been finally consummated. In our answer to these criticisms we cannot give a point by point comparison of these theologies with that of Van Ruler, nor can we discuss all the consequences that are entailed by these theologians 'corrections' to Van Ruler's theology. Therefore, in our answer, we will limit ourself to a summary of that which has already been worked out more fully in the main body of this work. In this summary we will reply to the above criticisms and briefly indicate the dangers entailed by the theological structure supported by these critics. These criticisms all have to do with the basic structure of systematic theology. According to Van Ruler the purpose of creation is the kingdom of God and not Jesus Christ. If we understood Christ to be the purpose of creation we can only talk of God's new presence in the eschaton and therefore man, the world and history are lost from view. Of fundamental importance here is the reformed doctrine of reconciliation as the vicarious satisfaction of Christ and the expiation of guilt. The incarnation was motivated exclusively by sin and is not an end in itself. Christ's sacrifice on the Cross was a 'transaction' between him and God. Therefore there was no 'confrontation' or 'encounter' between God and his people in the sacrifice on Golgotha. Here we must distinguish between the christological and the pneumatological points of view. Vriezen is perfectly correct when he states that Israel could not be transformed into a theocracy without the suffering and sacrificial death of the Servant of God.xxxix This is exactly what Van Ruler means when he speaks of Christ as an emergency measure that God put off for as long as possible! In Van Ruler's theology the messiahship of Jesus rests totally and completely on the fact of the resurrection, but also on the truth of the ascension. There is a discontinuity between christology and pneumatology. Reconciliation is 181 not an encounter between God and man - it must be understood christologically. However, reconciliation is put into effect pneumatologically in justification, sanctification and glorification.xl Christian life is lived on the basis of the truth of reconciliation but not in the lengthening of the incarnation. There can only be talk of the realization of salvation when it is remembered that this must be spoken of pneumatologically and is not identical to the reality of salvation in the exalted Christ. If we understand the realization of salvation purely in a christological and soteriological light (as Vriezen seems to) we are led to an impatient perfectionism which can only result in despair or rejection of this world. It is not true that Van Ruler ascribes an exclusively soteriological meaning to the New Testament. He states: "Het Nuiwe Testament is niet alleen evangelie, maar ook ten volle proclamatie van de wet; gelijk in het Oude Testament de wet ten volle gave der genade is en rust in het evangelie."xli Gospel and law are to be found in both Testaments but the gospel surely comes to the foreground in the New Testament so that in it there is "a one-sided concentration on guilt and its expiation as effected in Jesus Christ", but even here "they are not the real point at issue."xlii Therefore Vriezen is in complete agreement with Van Ruler when he states that "the New Testament is no less theocratically undergirded and no less eschatologically orientated toward the kingdom of God than the Old Testament."xliii In order to answer the remainder of the criticisms we must have a correct understanding of the law. "De eigenlijke en eenige inhoud van de wet Gods is God zelf, gelijk hij in de daad zijner openbaring tegenwoordig is. Dit staat en oudtestamentisch en nieuwtestamentisch vast. Dan gaat het in de wet om God zelf, zijn rijk, zijn wezen, zijn gerechtigheid en zijn daad. Dat beduidt dat men de wet Gods nooit op zichzelf mag nemen, los van hem die haar gaf en in haar tegenwoordig wil zijn."xliv 182 Furthermore the law must be understood as torah and not as nomos. The law is not a set of immutable rules to be lived up to but is rather the expression of the will of God. It is therefore incorrect to say that the law has been replaced by gospel. The gospel is given for the sake of the law. Thus it is not correct to say, with Stamm, that we no longer have works of the law but rather fruits of the Spirit. xlv They are exactly the same thing. Israel lost sight of this kerygmatic aspect of the law and took the law into their own hands in order to justify themselves. But Christ came to restore the law to its integrity and thus to emphasise that gospel precedes law. Therefore Stamm is also incorrect when he states: "Israel knew very well what substitution and atonement meant."xlvi If Israel understood the essence of the gospel so well surely they would not have misused God's law? When we understand the fact that in Van Ruler's theology gospel precedes law and that the law, understood as torah, is put into effect in the world, by the Spirit, with the gospel (that is, Christ's work of reconciliation on the cross) as its continual background, Vriezen's further objections simply fall away. Sanctification cannot be separated from reconciliation. The work of Jesus Christ is the continual background of the work of the Holy Spirit and the work of the Holy Spirit is the putting into effect of reconciliation in justification, sanctification and glorification. This does not lead to a repristination of Israel because the law is not a formal instance but an historical reality. Christianized nations are incidental repetitions of Israel, not because they reintroduce the mosaic law to the letter, but because the God of Israel binds himself to them through the sacrifice of reconciliation as 'the great ceremony of the law' and creates a 'liturgy of life' around this in which He wants to be worshipped in our entire earthly existence. Vriezen confuses this binding of the whole of cultural existence to the cross of Golgotha with a re-introduction of the entire Old Testament and of the mosaic law. If the groundlines for the christianization of culture and the model for christian life is not to be 183 found in the Bible, and especially in the Old Testament, where is it to be found? This question faces us with the choice of paganism or christianity.xlvii In my opinion Van Ruler's view that the law tells us what is given to us in God's righteousness, and the gospel tells us that it has all been given to us, and his view that gospel precedes law does full justice to the canonicity of the Old Testament. The Old Testament is the true Bible that contains the fully redemptive knowledge of beingxlviii because it contains God's promises - His gospel and His law. In the New Testament these promises are fulfilled and confirmed, but they are not realized. If we see Christ as the purpose of creation and thus see his incarnation as the realization of the promises of the Old Testament, surely we would have to agree with A. Harnack that to preserve the Old Testament "as one of the canonical documents of Protestantism is the result of religious and ecclesiastical paralysis."xlix The final set of criticisms, represented mainly by Thielicke, come down to this, that Van Ruler does not distinguish between theocracy and eschatology. According to Van Ruler a theocracy comes into being when the Word is proclaimed. The pagan context of being is broken and the Holy Spirit expresses Christ's sacrifice of reconciliation in justification, sanctification and glorification. The essence of a theocracy is that the Spirit is at work putting Christ's sacrifice into effect. "En de oerfout van alle ketterijen in dezen" (that is, in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit), "is wel de ongecontroleerde opvatting, als zou het werk van den Heiligen Geest de eschatologische realiteit zelve, althans een stukje er van, althans het begin er van zijn. Daartegenover moet strak worden volgehouden: het provisorisch karakter van het werk van den Heiligen Geest, dat het een werk is in de bedeeling tusschen hemelvaart en wederkomst, het concervatieve karakter van het werk van den Heiligen Geest, dat het een werk is, dat niet de oude wereld revolutionnair omzet in de niewe, maar dat het een werk is, 184 dat in de oude wereld conservatief, bewarend, bewaard bij de verkregen verlossing." "Het werk van den Geest is kern van de oudtestamentische theocratie, ook in Europa."l In the eschaton salvation will go completely into existence and then there will only remain the naked existence of things and the triune God. However, this never occurs in the dispensation of the Spirit. Therefore it is incorrect to assert that Van Ruler's theology results in a perfection of this world. All of Van Ruler's theology must be understood under the eschatological reserve of the final judgement. It is certainly this world that returns in the eschaton, that is made perfect in the eschaton. But this world does not develop towards this perfection. In fact, it will end in death and destruction, but in a new act God will resurrect this world. In this dispensation salvation only goes into existence fragmentarily and ambiguously. Therefore there remains a duality of salvation and existence and thus the church and the state also remain separate. Although salvation is only realized fragmentarily and ambiguously in sanctification, this is more in the purpose of God than reconciliation is. The incarnation of Christ was exclusively motivated by sin and is not an end in itself. Sanctification has reconciliation as its continual background but is more important because it puts this reconciliation into effect in the world. The purpose of creation is also not to be found in the complete development of the created human form. "Dit doel zit niet op de wijze van de entelechie in de geschapen dingen. Dat de dingen een doel hebben, is een moment in de gubernatio als onderdeel van de providentie. Dat God de dingen regeert, betekent primair, dat Hij ze een bestemming geeft."li Before we arrive at the humanitas we must go through the christianitas and the christianitas is expressed in us as the servant form of Jesus Christ.lii This is christologically determined but it is also a work of the Spirit and therefore eschatologically determined. As an eschatological reality this particular form of God in Christ which is expressed in us is destined to fall away. 185 It is not the telos that the being of man is aimed at. The telos does not lie in the means, in the Immanuel, in the God-with-us, but in the kingdom of Glory. What this kingdom is (and therefore what humanity will consist of) we do not yet know (1 John 3:2).liii The importance of understanding the kingdom of God (regnum Dei) as the purpose of creation becomes clear when we contrast this view with that which sees Christ as the purpose of creation. There are three variations of the view that Christ is the goal of creation: Christomonism, the elevatio theory and the nova creatio idea. But all three lose sight of this world, blur the distinction between God and mankind, fail to properly distinguish christology, pneumatology and eschatology, and fail to do justice to the canonicity of the Old Testament. Therefore they also fail to do justice to the traditional dogmas of the trinity and the eternal counsel of God. All these elements of the Gospel are only properly safeguarded by the doctrine of the messianic intermezzo. Conclusion In this study we have discussed the theology of A.A. van Ruler and considered many of the criticisms that have been levelled against it. However, we have not levelled any of our own criticisms against it. This does not mean that we are saying that Van Ruler's theology must be accepted as the perfect, irreproachable theology. Surely no one could ever write such a theology! However I do believe that there is such a lot of misunderstanding of his theology (as we can see in the above criticisms) that it is important for us to gain a correct understanding of this great theologian's ideas before we embark on a criticism of them. It is hoped that this work will contribute towards this understanding and a greater acceptance of 186 Van Ruler's theology. END 187 Notes for Conclusion i. P. van Hoof Intermezzo - Kontinuiteit en Diskontinuiteit in de Theologie van A.A. van Ruler - Eschatologie en Kultuur Ton Bolland Amsterdam 1974. ii. Ibid Pg. 285, 70. iii. Ibid Pg. 70, 80, 285. iv. This is not the place to give a full description of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity - this can be found in the Creeds of the Church (especially the Athanasian Creed) as well as H. Heppe Reformed Dogmatics Pg. 105-132; H. Bavinck The Doctrine of God Banner of Truth, Britain, 1991 Pg. 255-336; L. Berkhof Reformed Dogmatics Pg. 82-99. v. H. Bavinck The Doctrine of God Banner of Truth Trust, Britian 1991 Pg. 320. vi. A.A. van Ruler Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg. 11. vii. Ibid Pg. 9-10. viii. See also chapter 4 note 60. ix. On the basis of the trinitarian dogma we gain the correct understanding of Christ's person and work. Thus H. Bavinck also states: "sufficient knowledge concerning the 'outgoing works' is gained only when their trinitarian existence is recognized" op. cit. Pg. 332 - see chapter one Pg. 12-16. x. A.A. van Ruler op. cit. Pg. 11. xi. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. I Pg. 171. xii. H. Bavinck op. cit. Pg. 330-331. xiii. Ibid Pg. 319, 331-332. xiv. This has been discussed in chapter 3. xv. J. Moltmann The Crucified God Pg. 249. xvi. J. Macquarrie Twentieth Century Religious Thought SCM Press, London, 1989 Pg. 395-396. xvii. H. Bavinck op. cit. Pg. 332. xviii . cf. O. Weber Foundations of Dogmatics I Eerdmans Michigan 1988, Pg. 368-370, 388. 188 xix. H. Bavinck op. cit. Pg. 333; A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 23. xx. A.A. van Ruler Ik Geloof Pg. 58 xxi. K. Barth Church Dogmatics I,1 Pg. 404 quoted in O. Weber op. cit. Pg. 369. xxii . See for instance, his article entitled De Noodzakelijkheid van Een Trinitarische Theologie in Verwachting en Voltooiing Pg. 9-28. xxiii. J. Alex van Wyk Die Apostolaat van die Kerk No. 1 of: Teologiese studies oor die sending van die kerk in die wereld. Morija, 1958 Pg. 25; This criticism as well as those of H. Thielicke, J.J. Stamm and Th. Vriezen (and others) are also discussed by B. Engelbrecht in Agtergrond en Grondlyne van die Teokratiese Visioen Pg. 239-275. xxiv. J. van Wyk op. cit. Pg. 25-26. xxv. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 112. xxvi. See chapter 2. xxvii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 54-57. xxviii. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg. 49; cf. L. Berkhof Systematic Theology Pg. 103. xxix. 'Predestination' is used as a synonym of 'eternal decree'. xxx. God's acts find their basis in his counsel but are not identical to it. xxxi. H. Bavinck Handleiding bij het Onderwijs in den Christelijken Godsdienst J.K. Kok, Kampen 1932 Pg. 80. xxxii. See chapter 2 esp. Pg. 60-72. xxxiii. H. Thielicke Theological Ethics II Politics Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1969 Pg. 614 xxxiv. Ibid. Pg. 604-614. xxxv. J.J. Stamm Jesus Christ and the Old Testament in C. Westermann Elements of Old Testament Hermeneutics, London, 1962 Pg. 204. xxxvi. Ibid. Pg. 200-210. xxxvii. Also found in Westermann op. cit. Pg. 211-223. xxxviii. It is interesting to note that while Thielicke absolutely rejects Van Ruler's theology Stamm and Vriezen express a positive appreciation of it. However, all three express basically the same criticism which refers to the entire structure and foundation of Van Ruler's theology. 189 xxxix. Th. Vriezen op. cit. Pg. 218. xl. Dr. J.A. Heyns states: "Van Ruler se voorstelling, as sou die vervulling van de wet nog nie met die werk van Christus voltooi wees nie maar voortgaan deur die Heilige Gees tot aan die voleinding ... bevredig nie. Christus het aan die eis van die wet voldoen, en daarmee die wet volkome, sonder enige voorlopigheid, vervul." Die Nuwe Mens Onderweg, Tafelberg, Cape Town 1970 Pg. 53n. This statement shows a complete misunderstanding of Van Ruler's distinction between the christological and the pneumatological manner of thought. Of course the law has been completely fulfilled, without any provisionality, in Christ. But this took place outside of us and must be fulfilled in us by the Holy Spirit, as the expression of salvation. xli. A.A. Van Ruler V.W. Pg. 472-473. xlii. A.A. Van Ruler CCOT Pg. 51, 49. xliii. Th. Vriezen op. cit. Pg. 217-218. xliv. A.A. Van Ruler V.W. Pg. 475. xlv. J.J. Stamm op. cit. Pg. 209. xlvi. Ibid Pg. 208. xlvii. B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 260. xlviii. A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 72. xlix. A. Harnack Marcion Pg. 217, quoted in A.A. van Ruler CCOT Pg. 10. l. A.A. van Ruler Religie en Politiek Pg. 147, 137. li. A.A. van Ruler Th.W. VI Pg. 77-78. lii. A.A. van Ruler Gestaltwerdung Christi in der Welt Pg. 13. liii. A.A. van Ruler V.W. Pg. 96-100; B. Engelbrecht op. cit. Pg. 250. 190 BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson B.W. THE LIVING WORLD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT Longman England 1987 Anderson B.W. (ed) THE OLD TESTAMENT AND CHRISTIAN FAITH London 1964 Anderson G.W. (ed) TRADITION AND INTERPRETATION Clarendon Press Oxford 1979 Augustine CITY OF GOD Penguin Books Great Britain 1984 Aulen G. CHRISTUS VICTOR SPCK London 1987 Baker D.L. TWO TESTAMENTS ONE BIBLE Apollos England 1991 Barr J. FUNDAMENTALISM SCM Press London 1977 Barr J. OLD AND NEW IN INTERPRETATION SCM Press London 1966 Barr J. THE BIBLE IN THE MODERN WORLD SCM Press London 1990 Barth K. CREDO Hodder and Stoughton London 1964 Barth K. DOGMATICS IN OUTLINE SCM Press London 1988 Bavinck H. GEREFORMEERDE DOGMATIEK (4 VOLS) J.H. Kok Kampen 1967 Bavinck H. THE DOCTRINE OF GOD Banner of Truth Kent 1991 Bavinck H. HANDLEIDING BIJ HET ONDERWIJS IN DEN CHRISTELIJKEN GODSDIENST J.H. Kok Kampen 1932 Berkhof H. CHRIST THE MEANING OF HISTORY 194 Grand Rapids Baker 1979 Berkhof H. CHRISTIAN FAITH W.B. Eerdmans Michigan 1990 Berkhof L. A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE Banner of Trust Edinburgh 1978 Berkhof L. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Banner of Truth Edinburgh 1988 Berkouwer G.C. STUDIES IN DOGMATICS (14 VOLS) Eerdmans Michigan 1980 Berkouwer G.C. and Van Der Woude A.S.(ed) IN GESPREK MET VAN RULER Callenbach Nijkerk 1969 Bright J. THE KINGDOM OF GOD Abingdon Press Nashville 1952 Bright J. THE AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT Baker Book House Michigan 1986 Bruce F.F. THIS IS THAT Paternoster Press Devon 1976 Brunner E. THE DIVINE HUMAN ENCOUNTER SCM Press London 1944 Brunner E. DOGMATICS (3 VOLS) Westminister Press Philadelphia Bultmann R. NEW TESTAMENT AND MYTHOLOGY Fortress Press Philadelphia 1989 Calvin J. INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION Westminister Press Philadelphia 1960 Cate R.L. TESTAMENT OLD TESTAMENT ROOTS FAITH Broadman Press Nashville 1982 Cleaver H. AN APPROACH TO THE OLD TESTAMENT Epworth Press London 1961 Cook S. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BIBLE 195 FOR NEW Penguin Books England 1952 Cullmann O. CHRIST AND TIME SCM Press London 1962 Cullmann O. THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCM Press London 1963 Cullmann O. SALVATION IN HISTORY SCM Press London 1976 A CONCISE DICTIONRY OF THEOLOGICAL AND RELATED TERMS J.L.van Schaik Pretoria 1990 Deist F. Dodd C.H. GOSPEL AND LAW Columbia University Press New York 1963 Dodd C.H. THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE Fontana London 1960 Dodd C.H. PARABLES OF THE KINGDOM Nisbet Digswell Place 1961 Engelbrecht B. THE ULTIMATE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TORAH in JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY FOR SOUTH AFRICA No.61 December 1987 Engelbrecht B. THE LAW OF MOSES IS THE LAW OF GOD Unpublished article Engelbrecht B. A.A. VAN RULER MODERNE TEOKRAAT N.G. Tydskrif Part 12 No. 3 1971 Engelbrecht B. DIE GEKRUISIGDE GOD EN DIE MESIAANSE INTERMEZZO N.G. Tydskrif Part 17 No.3 1976 Engelbrecht B. GOD EN DIE POLITIEK Butterworth Durban 1978 Engelbrecht B. AGTERGRONDE EN GRONDLYNE VAN DIE TEOKRATIESE VISIOEN ('N INLEIDING TOT DIE TEOKRATIESE TEOLOGIE VAN PROF A.A. VAN RULER) Unpublished PH.D Thesis (Unisa 1963) Engelbrecht B. DIE TWEEHEID VAN KERK EN STAAT 196 Perskor Johannesburg 1986 Engelbrecht B. TEOKRATIESE STELLINGNAME EN FRONTVERBREDING in KERK EN THEOLOGIE 27 Jaargang No.1 1976 Engelbrecht B. NATUUR EN GENADE IN DIE TEOLOGIE VAN A.A. VAN RULER in KERK EN THEOLOGIE 32 Jaargang No.2 1981 Engelbrecht B. THE INDWELLING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT in JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA No.30 and 31 1980 Engelbrecht B. IS CHRIST THE SCOPUS OF SCRIPTURE? in CALVINUS REFORMATOR Potchefstroom University 1982 Engelbrecht B. DIE FRAGMENTARIESE EN TEENSTRYDIGE KARAKTER VAN DIE INWONING EN WERK VAN DIE GEES in KONINGRYK, KERK EN KOSMOS Pro-Christo Publications Bloemfontein 1989 Eichrodt W. THEOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 2 Vols SCM Press London 1961 Fison J.E. THE FAITH OF THE BIBLE Penguin Great Britain 1957 Goodrick E.W. THE NIV HANDY CONCORDANCE Zondervan Michigan 1982 Graafland C. NIEUWE BEZINNING OP HET CHRISTELIJK GELOOF in THEOLOGICA REFORMATA XVII 1974 Graafland C. VAN CALVIJN TOT BARTH Boekencentrum Gravenhage 1987 Gunneweg A. UNDERSTANDING THE OLD TESTAMENT SCM Press London 1978 Harnack A. von HISTORY OF DOGMA (7 VOLS) Noble Offset Printers USA 1958 Hartwell H. THE THEOLOGY OF KARL BARTH Duckworth London 1964 197 Hasel G.F. OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY : BASIC ISSUES IN THE CURRENT DEBATE Grand Rapids Michigan 1972 Hebert A.G. THE AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT Faber and Faber London 1947 Hebert A.G. THE THRONE OF DAVID Faber and Faber London 1941 Hengstenberg E.W. CHRISTOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTMENT Kregel Publications Michigan 1970 Heppe H. REFORMED DOGMATICS Baker Book House Michigan 1978 Heyns J.A. THE CHURCH N.G. Kerk Boekhandel Pretoria 1980 Heyns J.A. DIE NUWE MENS ONDERWEG Tafelberg Cape Town 1970 THE BIBLE AND THE FUTURE W.B. Eerdmans Michigan 1989 Hoekema A. Hommes Tj. SOVEREIGNTY AND SAECULUM : A.A. VAN RULER'S THEOCRATIC THEOLOGY Harvard Dissertation 1967 Johnson L.T. THE WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT : AN INTERPRETATION Fortress Philadelphia 1986 Johnson P. A HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY Penguin Books London 1990 Jonker W.D. 'n EIETYDSE GELOOFSLEER in NED. GEREF. THEOLOGIESE TYDSKRIF XVI 1975 Jonker W.D. CHRISTUS DIE MIDDELAAR NG Kerkboekhandel Pretoria 1983 Kasper W. JESUS THE CHRIST Paulist Press U.S.A. 1985 Kegley C.W. THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL TILLICH Pilgrim Press New York 1982 198 Konig A. HERE I AM UNISA Pretoria 1978 Konig A. THE ECLIPSE OF CHRIST IN ESCHATOLOGY Eerdmans Michigan 1989 Konig A. NEW AND GREATER THINGS Unisa Pretoria 1988 Krealing E.G. REFORMATION THE OLD TESTAMENT SINCE THE Schacken Books New York 1955 Kummel W.G. THEOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCM Press London 1980 Kung H. THE CHURCH Image Books New York 1982 Kung H. JUSTIFICATION Burns and Oats London 1981 Kuyper A. ASLEEP IN JESUS Eerdmans Michigan 1929 Kuyper A. THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT Eerdmans Michigan 1979 Lane D.A. CHRIST AT THE CENTRE Paulist Press New York 1991 Larondelle H.K. THE ISRAEL OF GOD IN PROPHECY Andrews University Press Michigan 1983 Lohfink N. THE CHRISTIAN MEANING TESTAMENT Bruce Publishers Milwaukee 1968 Lloyd Jones D.M. AUTHORITY Banner of Truth England 1984 Mackay J.A. A PREFACE TO CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY Nisbet and Co. London 1948 Macquarrie J. IN SEARCH OF HUMANITY 199 OF THE OLD SCM Press London 1982 Macquarrie J. PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY SCM Press London 1986 Macquarrie J. TWENTIETH CENTURY RELIGIOUS THOUGHT SCM Press London 1988 Miskotte K.H. WHEN THE GODS ARE SILENT Collins London 1967 Moltmann J. THEOLOGY OF HOPE:ON THE GROUND AND IMPLICATIONS OF A CHRISTIAN ESCHATOLOGY SCM Press London 1967 Moltmann J. THE CRUCIFIED GOD SCM Press London 1992 Moltmann J. DE GEKRUISIGDE GOD Ambo 1972 Monk R.C. and Stamley J.D. EXPLORING CHRISTIANITY Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs 1990 Mowinkel S. THE OLD TESTAMENT AS THE WORD OF GOD Basil Blackwell Oxford 1960 Neil W. THE REDISCOVERY OF THE BIBLE Hodder and Stoughtan London 1956 Niebuhr R. THE NATURE AND DESTINY OF MAN (2 VOLS) Nisbet and Co. London 1943 Noordmans O. GESTALTE EN GEEST Holland Amsterdam 1956 Noordmans O. HERSCHEPPING (2 VOLS) Holland Amsterdam 1956 Ploger O. THEOCRACY AND ESCHATOLOGY Oxford 1986 Riches J. JUDAISM JESUS AND THE TRANSFORMATION Douton, Longman and Todd London 1980 Ridderbos H.N. THE COMING OF THE KINGDOM 200 OF Ridderbos H.N. Presbyterian and Reformed Philadelphia 1962 PAUL AND JESUS Presbyterian and Reformed Philadelphia 1958 Ridderbos H.N. PAUL : AN OUTLINE OF HIS THEOLOGY Eerdmans Michigan 1975 Ridderbos H.N. TESTAMENT REDEMPTIVE HISTORY AND SCRIPTURES Presbyterian and Reformed New Jersey THE NEW 1988 Ringgren H. THE MESSIAH IN THE OLD TESTAMENT SCM Press London 1956 Ringgren H. ISREALITE RELIGION SPCK London 1966 Ringgren H. SACRIFICE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT Lutterworth Press London 1956 Robinson H.W. THE OLD TESTAMENT : ITS MAKING AND MEANING University of London Press London 1947 Robinson H.W. THE CHRISTIAN EXPERIANCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT Nisbet and Co. London 1930 Robinson H.W.(ed) RECORD AND REVELATION Clarendon Press Oxford 1951 Rossouw H.W. CALVIN'S HERMENEUTICS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE in CALVINUS REFORMATOR Potchefstroom University 1982 Rowley H.H. THE RELEVANCE OF THE BIBLE James Clarke and Co Great Britain 1948 Rowley H.H. THE FAITH OF ISRAEL SCM Press London 1986 Rowley H.H. THE REDISCOVERY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT James Clarke and Co London 1945 Rowley H.H. THE UNITY OF THE BIBLE Carey Kingsgate Press London 1953 201 Runia K. DE GODHEID VAN CHRISTUS in KERK EN THEOLOGIE 45ste Jaargang No.1 1994 Sanders E.P. JESUS AND JUDAISM SCM Press London 1987 Schippers R. HET MESSIAANSE INTERMEZZO BIJ VAN RULER in BEZINNING Jaargang 6 1951 Seeberg R. TEXT BOOK OF THE HISTORY OF DOCTRINES Baker Book House Michigan 1964 Smart J.D. THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE London 1961 Solle D. CHRIST THE REPRESENTATIVE Fortress Press Philadelphia 1967 Stamm J.J. JESUS CHRIST AND THE OLD TESTAMENT in ELEMENTS OF OLD TESTAMENT HERMENEUTICS London 1962 Stauffer E. THEOLOGIE DES NEUEN TESTAMENTS C. Bertelsmann Verslag Gutersloh 1948 Thielicke H. THEOLOGICAL ETHICS II: POLITICS Fortress Press Philadelphia 1969 Tillich P. THE SHAKING OF THE FOUNDATIONS Penguin Books Great Britain 1964 Tillich P. THE PROTESTANT ERA University of Chicago Press Chicago 1957 Tillich P. SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY (3 vols) University of Chicago Press Chicago 1957 Tillich P. A HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN THOUGHT Simon and Schuster USA 1968 Van Hoof P. INTERMEZZO KONTINUITEIT EN DISKONTINUITEIT IN DE THEOLOGIE VAN A.A. VAN RULER - ESCHATOLOGIE EN KULTUUR Ton Bolland Amsterdam 1974 202 Van Rooyen J.H.P. KERK EN STAAT 'n VERGELYKING TUSSEN KUYPER EN VAN RULER Groningen 1964 Van Ruler A.A. THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TESTAMENT W.B. Eerdmans Michigan 1971 Van Ruler A.A. GOD'S SON AND GOD'S WORLD W.B. Eerdmans Michigan 1960 Van Ruler A.A. DE DOOD WORDT OVERWONNEN Callenbach Nijkerk Van Ruler A.A. ZECHARIAH SPEAKS TODAY Lutterworth Press London 1962 Van Ruler A.A. DE VERVULLING VAN DE WET Callenbach Nijkerk 1947 Van Ruler A.A. RELIGIE EN POLITIEK Callenbach Nijkerk 1945 Van Ruler A.A. BIJZONDER EN ALGEMEEN AMBT Callenbach Nijkerk 1952 Van Ruler A.A. IK GELOOF Callenbach Nijkerk Van Ruler A.A. Nijkerk 1969 THEOLOGISCH WERK (6 vols) Van Ruler A.A. GESTALTWERDUNG CHRISTI IN DER WELT Neukirchen 1956 Van Ruler A.A. VERWACHTING EN VOLTOOIING Callenbach Nijkerk 1978 Van Wyk J.A. DIE APOSTOLAAT VAN DIE KERK No.1 of TEOLOGIESE STUDIES OOR DIE SENDING VAN DIE KERK IN DIE WERELD Morija 1958 Velema W.H. CONFRONTATIE MET VAN RULER J.H. Kok Kampen 1962 Von Rad G. OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY (2 vols) 203 AND THE OLD Callenbach Vriezen Th. Vriezen Th. SCM Press London 1985 AN OUTLINE OF OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY Basil Blackwell Oxford 1966 THEOCRACY AND SOTERIOLOGY in ELEMENTS OF OLD TESTAMENT HERMENEUTICS London 1962 Vischer W. THE WITNESS OF THE OLD TESETAMENT TO CHRIST (Vol 1 The Pentateuch) Lutterworth Press London 1949 Vorster W.S. (ed) SCRIPTURE AND THE USE OF SCRIPTURE Muckeneuk (Unisa) Pretoria 1979 Weber O. FOUNDATIONS OF DOGMATICS (2 VOLS) Eerdmans Michigan 1983 Westermann C. THE OLD TESTAMENT AND JESUS CHRIST Augsburg Publishers Minnesota 1968 Westermann C. ELEMENTS OF OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY John Knox Press Atlanta 1982 Westermann C. HERMENEUTICS ELEMENTS OF OLD London 1962 THE HOLY BIBLE Revised Standard Version W.M. Collins Sons and Co Ltd 1986 204 TESTAMENT