Early

Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-

journal-content.

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.
 THE BIBLE OF JOHN CALVIN
GEORGE H. GILBERT, PH.D., D.D.
Northampton,Mass.

No literarywork of the sixteenth century better measures the

vast significanceof the Renaissancethan the esegetical writings of
Calvin. To pass from the study of Athanasius or Augustine to
that of Calvin is almost like a change of worlds. In the exegetical
writings of those great men of the early church one floundersin a
boundlessmorass,whose occasional bright and fragrantflowersare
a poor substitute for solid and safe ground. Their Bible was a
magicalbook, strangerthan any fairy-tale,unreal,impossible. Quite
differentwas the Bible of Calvin. Walking with him through the
paths of Scripture,one feels that there is somethingfirm underthe
feet, that one is dealingwith real humanhistoryand life. The voice
of the guide may be less winning and attractivethan the voice of
Augustine,but it is immeasurablymore competentin explainingthe
significanceof what is seen as we pass along. The fanciful allegori-
zationsof Augustinegive place to the sane commentsof a balanced
judgmentfortifiedby much exact knowledge.
The exegesis of Calvin was as remarkablein its way as were
the deeds of Luther, and when comparedwith the work of the
third and fourthcenturiesis at once seen to belong to a vastly higher
order. But while all this may truthfullybe said to the praise of the
French reformer,neverthelesshis Bible was not the Bible of Jesus.
He did not handle sacredbooks as Jesus did or as we do today. In
some points his method was fundamentallywrong. It was neither
that of supremereligiousgenius, like the method of Jesus, nor that
of science, like the method of modernscholars. Of these points in
Calvin'streatmentof the Bible,hithertounnoticedor ignored,it is our
purposenow to speak; and this we do in the interestof a juster esti-
mate of the foremosttheologianof the reformation,and also to illus-
trate the great advancemade in biblical interpretationsince his day.
Calvin's conception of the Bible, though purified from many
344
 THE BIBLEOF JOHN CALVIN
345
ancient errors, was leavened throughoutwith a mechanicalview of
inspiration;but as this view has now been abandonedby the progres-
sive churches,and is withal well known,it is not necessaryto dwell
upon it. We no longer think of the Bible as having been supernat-
urally "dictated," a book with whose content "nothingbelongingto
man" is mixed. For us the four evangelistsdo not speak "as with
one mouth,"nor do we think of explainingthe first verse of the Bible
by the last verse on the ground that both have the same author.
Whenthe dictionof the prophetsis " neat and elegantand even splen-
did," we do not regardit as a proof that the "Holy Spirit hath been
pleased to show that he is not deficient in eloquence." According
to the modernview of inspiration,the Bible has becomean altogether
differentbook; and could we assumethat Calvin,if he were to return
to the earth, would still have the same views of Scripturewhich he
once taught in Geneva, our Bible would probably seem to him a
very poor affair. And yet the change which has passed upon it is to
us as a changefrom death to life.
Again, Calvin subordinated the Bible to the doctrine of the
church. In theory,indeed, he rejectedwith much feeling " the perni-
cious errorthat the Scriptureshave only so much weight as the suf-
frages of the church concede to them, as though the eternal and
invisible truth of God dependedon the arbitrarywill of man;" and
yet in fact he himself measuredthe Bible with the measuring-rodof
church doctrine, and searched it by the light of the Nicene Creed.
In other words, he came to the Bible with a well-settledand firmly
held system of theology,and, like every one who does that, he found
no difficulty in discoveringthe requisite Scriptureproof. As this
feature of Calvin's interpretationis obviously of great importance,
we must ask the reader to consider two or three illustrationsof it.
And when we do this, it will be well to rememberthat this particular
errorof Calvin still flourisheslike the palm tree. What denomina-
tional "ism" is there among us which would not shrivel up if it
had no othernourishmentthan that which it gets fromthe Bible ?
But to our illustrations. In explaining the narrative of the
visit of three men to Abraham at Mamre, Calvin lays down this
general law, that "wheneverGod manifestedhimself to the Fathers,
Christ was the mediatorbetween him and them." But whence did
346 THE BIBLICAL WORLD

Calvinderivethis generalprinciple,whichhe introducesin his com-

mentaryon Genesisas thoughit werea self-evidenttruth? He did
not claimto get it fromGenesis,nordid he mentionany chapterof
the Biblein whichhe foundit. No, andhe couldnot havedoneso
if he had tried. He unconsciously readinto Genesiswhat he had
receivedfromthe earlytheologians.
Take anothertypical case. In his commentaryon Romans,
speakingof I: 3, Calvinsays: "Two thingsmustbe foundin Christ
in orderthatwemayobtainsalvationin him,evendivinityandhuman-
ity. His divinitypossessespower,righteousness, life, which by his
humanityareconveyedto us." Butwhat" must " be foundin Scrip-
turecan be found. If we must, wecanprovefromScripture thedivine
rightof kings,we canfindamplejustification of slavery,andevenof
polygamy. If we must, we can readilydeducefromthe Bible the
doctrinethat the end justifiesthe means,or the doctrinethat the
earthis the centerof the universe. If we must, we can showfrom
Scripturethat it was right for Calvinto have Servetusburnedat
the stake,and we can show with equalor greatercogencythat it
wouldhavebeenrightto burnCalvinwherehe burnedServetus.
Whenan interpreter says,as he confrontsa passageof Scripture,
"Now this doctrinemust be foundhere,"he plainlysubordinates
the Bibleto the church,andmakesit quiteimpossibleto understand
whatthe Bibleteaches. In declaringwhatmust be foundin Christ,
Calvinjoinedhimself with the Jews of Christ'sown day, who,
becausetheyweresurethattheyknewwhatthe Messiahmustbe in
orderto helpthem,passedperversejudgmenton Jesus.
A thirdfeatureof Calvin'sinterpretation whichmustbe regarded
as fundamentally wrongis its failureto giveanypre-eminence to the
revelationof God in Jesus. Revelation,as apprehended by Calvin,
is essentiallya deadlevelfromGenesisto the Apocalypse.He says
that "whateveris presentedto us in the presentday in our sacra-
mentswas ancientlyreceivedby the Jewsin theirs,even Christ and
his spiritual riches." The differencebetweenthe Old Testament
andthe New is mercly"formalandadministrative."
Calvin'sfailureto giveanypre-eminence to therevelationof Jesus
mightbe copiouslyillustratedeitherfromhis commentaries or the
Institutes,andwithreference to anylineof Christian teaching.Tllus,
 THE BIBLEOF JOHN CALVIN 347

out of some fifteenpassagesof Scripturecited in the Institutesin

regardtothekingdomof Christ,onlythreearefromJesushimself,and
they standon the same levelwiththe utterancesof the Psalmsand
Daniel. One may read Calvin'sentiretreatmentof the subjectof
God, and therewill not be founda singlereferenceto anythingthat
Jesussai(l in regardto God'scharacter.The wordsof the Master
whichare cited are made to referto the doctrineof the Trinity,
almostwithoutexception. Jesussaid thatno one but the Sonknew
the Father,but onewouldnotinferfromCalvin'spresentation of the
doctrineof God that Jesus knewhim anv morefully than did the
PsalmistQrthe prophets.His wordsarenotevendiscriminated from
thoseof anvof thewriterswhoarequoted;theyaresimplythewords
of onemorewitness.
The samemethodis pursuedin referenceto Jesus himself. He
is not consideredas supremeauthorityeven in regardto his own
person. Isaiahand the Psalmsare equallygood authority,and are
morefrequentlyquoted. Moreattentionis givento the Christwho
is supposedto be foundin the forty-fifthpsalmthanto the Jesusof
the Sermonon the Mount.
Now, this is a travestyon interpretation,
thanwhichnonecan be
imaginedmoredisastrousto the truth. If the claimsof Jesus are
admitted;if he fulfilledthe law andthe prophets;if he aloneknew
the Fatherand couldmakehim known; if he firstmadeknownthe
principlesof the kingdomof God; if he made the acceptanceof
his teachingandthe followingof his examplefundamental principles
of discipleship, thenobviouslythe revelationof Godin himis not to
be draggeddown to the level of his revelationin Genesisor the
Psalms. An exegesiswhichdoesthis is neitherloyalto the founder
of Christianity norscientific.
To recapitulate:Calvin'sinterpretation of the Bible was bur-
denedwith three graveerrors a mechanicalviewof inspiration, a
subordination of Scriptureto the doctrinesof the church,ancla fail-
ureto givepre-eminence to therevelationof Godin Jesus. It marked
an advanceon the interpretation of Augustineand the otherearly
Fathers,but hasbeenleftfarbehindin the marchof biblicalscience.