This post is part of a series walking through the first volume of Abraham Kuyper’s Common Grace.
The “mystery” Paul discusses in Ephesians 1:9 (“Making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ”) is the calling of the nations that Kuyper discussed in Chapter 46. This mystery is not mere Gentile conversion–everyone knew that could happen. Nor is it just that the Gentile can go straight to being God’s people without having to become a Jewish convert first.
In fact, the mystery which Paul speaks about on many occasions has remained unexplained by the Church. Even Calvin wasn’t sure exactly what it meant. And yet, when we put all the mystery passages together, what we see is that it is a combination of the Incarnation and the calling of the nations. These two things are intertwined with–but not added to–each other. Jesus became flesh, and he became a Jew, but he saves all of humanity rather than just the Jews.
Kuyper is not offering a defense of universal atonement here. Scripture is quite clear that atonement is particular even as the world and human nature are saved. There is a kind of universalism in the Gospel, but it has to do with what will be saved (all of creation), not with who will be saved (only believers).
And this is the point where, as we’ll see, I go separate ways from Kuyper. The fundamental question here, as I’ve said elsewhere, is the question of what the cross atones for. Is it just believers? (which is where I fall) Or is it believers + cultures, nature, rocks, butterflies, etc, and only unrepentant unbelievers remain unatoned for. More on this as we go through the series.
Back to Kuyper!
Jesus was of course Jewish, but he was not only Jewish. He was human. That is, he did not take on just a Jewish identity, he took on all of human nature. If all of this is what we learn from Hebrews about Melchizedek, as Kuyper has argued, and this understanding of a broader view of God’s interaction with mankind beyond just the Jewish people in the OT is a part of Christian maturity, then we need to correct a deficiency in our doctrine. Specifically, we need to be sure to see that God interacts with humanity outside of conversion by means of common grace. This truth should affect our world-and life-view, as well as our practice.
We immediately run into two conflicting notions. The first is that all mankind is entirely depraved. God’s work has been mostly thwarted by Satan, and only a few people are saved. Judgment, when it finally comes, will dispense with all but the few elect. This ‘false foundational notion’ has three forms:
- The ‘chiliastic’ view is that salvation is narrow and only comes through the Jews (so these are the people to whom Paul responds by denying the necessity of circumcision). In our time, this view takes the forms that believes that the Jews will be restored to their ethnic/national/religious place in the end times.
- The Roman Catholic view is basically the same, with the Roman Catholic church replacing the Jews as the source and nexus of salvation. (Kuyper was writing pre-Vatican II, but in some ways this is still a legitimate reading.)
- The ‘spiritualistic’ view replaces the Jews and the Roman Catholic church with the company of the ‘born again,’ and focuses on the soul to the exclusion of the world–and occasionally to the exclusion of the body.
All three of these forms separate this life from the coming one by creating categories of ‘meaningful’ and ‘transitory.’ The transitory category perishes forever, while the meaningful category lasts. All three don’t care about the ‘salvation of the world’, and only focus on ‘the exaltation of their own.’ (423)
The second notion, by contrast, is that Scripture says that God continues to work in common and particular grace. The former works in all of mankind. The latter works in the few elect. At the judgment, ‘humanness’, or ‘human life,’ will be saved in the ‘renewed earth.’ God is saving the world and re-creating the earth–though only elect human beings will be saved to this recreated earth. This is the Scriptural view, and it is Scripture which Kuyper argues must separate the true view from the false.
Of course, something is separated out–but what? And how does this thing that is separated relate to that which is not-separated? That is, I am bound for heaven through the work of Christ, and my neighbor is not while he has no such relationship (a subject of much prayer for me, and not enough evangelism). So much all faithful Christians, and even a goodly number of heretics, will agree on. But where we disagree is: what is the status of the cultural institutions that I share with my neighbor? Our city, the clubs we are members of, the local schools, the businesses that we both shop at, our families, etc? What about the natural world that includes us both? This is where we are divided.
Kuyper argues that Abraham held to no absolute or strict separation. Israel as a nation did, but they were only a symbol or a shadow. Jerusalem was the type of the heavenly city, and only a temporary one. The false views Kuyper has outlined above fail to understand this, and so go astray in their views. Which means we need a thorough understanding of symbol and type, which is where the next chapter will go.
Dr. Coyle Neal is co-host of the City of Man Podcast and an Associate Professor of Political Science at Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar, MO
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In