“Nothing is more central or basic than union or communion with Christ. . . . Union with Christ is really the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation not only in its application but also in its once-for-all accomplishment in the finished work of Christ. Indeed the whole process of salvation has its origin in one phase of union with Christ and salvation has in view the realization of other phases of union with Christ. This can be readily seen if we remember that brief expression which is so common in the New Testament, namely, “in Christ.” It is that which is meant by “in Christ” that we have in mind when we speak of “Union with Christ.” It is apparent that Scripture applies the expression “in Christ” to much more than the application of redemption” (John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied, 161).
On Being Part of an Exegetical Tradition
“After rehearsing the story of the decision to produce a new set of annotations and of the formation of their committee, the English annotators go on to clarify the nature of their efforts and the relation of their work to several sets of eminent earlier annotations, namely Diodati’s Italian Annotations, the Dutch Annotations arising out of the Synod of Dort, and Geneva Annotations. So also, in the case of the Geneva Annotations, the annotators indicate their respect for this revered running commentary and state that they view it as entirely orthodox, free from theological errors–yet they have worked as the “builders of a new house,” not merely patchign up an old edifice, but taking it down and replacing it with a new one. Then they rather carefully note . . . their reliance on these previous expositions of the text. They have indeed used texts,
yet so, that if we have borrowed aught of either, as they have done of those, who did precede them, in the like Observations, we shall desire but to take it to usury, and to make our returne of what we receive, farre above the rate of ordinary interest: And in this holy businesse we have no other ambition than to give better satisfaction to an apprehensive Reader, for the sense of the whole Bible, then (in this kinde) we have met withall, in any one Worke of what Authors soever.
“In their method, therefore, they have followed the advice of the apostles, recognizing that no Scripture is “of private interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20) and also that “the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor. 13:42)–accordingly, the “private dictates” of the annotators have been “submitted . . . to the censure and correction of [their] Colleagues in this Service daily assembled together, for the perusal of every ones parts.” Clearly, then, there were borrowings: the new house was not erected out of entirely new brick and lumber–but the annotators not only assumed this background in the earlier tradition, both by their admission and explanation and by their anonymity, they refrained from taking personal credit for what they perceived to be the propounding, not of personal opinion, but of the results of an exegetical tradition of which they were a part” (Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 28-29).
Two Remarkable Things
“Two things are remarkable, at least to the modern observer, about this list [of the author-annotators] and the Annotations–on the one hand, the list was broadly constructed, drawing not only on the Presbyterian and independent constituencies of the Parliament that would be called together into the Westminster Assembly, but also on the Episcopalian, and indeed, Royalist constituency that would not contribute to the Assembly and its standards. In the latter group we count Ussher and Richardson, both bishops in Ireland; Featley, and Smallwood. On the other hand, the annotators remained anonymous in the published text: despite the eminence of many of the contributors, their names were not listed in the prefaces, nor were they affixed to the commentaries on the various books of the Bible”(Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 21-22).
Not Original, But Rather A Standard
“Their [the annotators] intention had not been to produce an original work, but rather a standard commentary that drew on the already sizable and significant Reformed exegetical tradition (Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 19).
Context
“The context for understanding the Westminster Confession is, certainly, the exegetical and doctrinal heritage of the Reformation as presented through the interpretive glass of the English and Scot Reformed theology of the mid-seventeenth century, which was itself part of the larger phenomenon that has been called ‘international Calvinism'” (Richard A Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 9).
Preaching
“Charles II once asked John Owen (1616-1683), “the prince of Puritans,” why he went to hear the preaching of the unlearned tinker of Bedford, John Bunyan. Owen responded, “May it please your majesty, could I possess the tinker’s abilities for preaching, I would willingly relinquish all my learning” (Andrew Thomson, “Life of Dr. Owen,” in The Works of John Owen, 1:xcii, quoted in Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology, 712).
The Developing Reformed Exegetical Tradition
“One of the most fruitful ways of analyzing the continuities and commonalities, as well as the discontinuities and nuances of divergence and difference, between the Reformers and the writings of the Reformed orthodox or Puritan writers is to examine trajectories of exegesis–specifically to chart the rise of orthodoxy in and through the developing Reformed exegetical tradition” (Richard A. Muller and Bruce S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 3).
The Christian Home
“What, then, is the context within which catechizing is to occur if it is to have its optimum sanctifying impact? First, the well-ordered Christian home is the foundation upon which is built the discipleship of covenant children in the ‘discipline and instruction’ (NASB, ESV), what the old version termed the ‘nurture and admonition of the Lord’ (Eph. 6:4 KJV). Fathers are charged with this responsibility” (Terry L. Johnson, Catechizing Our Children: The Whys and Hows of Teaching the Shorter Catechism Today, 2).
Total Depravity
“Without conviction of sin there will never be acceptance of the gospel. It is the preaching of man’s total depravity and inability manifested in the overt transgression of God’s law that is calculated to induce this sense of sin, of helplessness and of need. And so this doctrine of depravity and inability is not only necessary as belonging to the whole counsel of God but is also one of the most fruitful elements of that counsel in promoting the interests of wholesome effective evangelism” (John Murray, Collected Writings, vol. 1, 129).
Faith
“The faith which God foresees is the fruit and not the root of electing grace” (John Murray, Collected Writings, vol. 1, 121).