A Word from Bob 

In Reformed Christian theology, unregenerate persons are totally depraved and all of their thinking is seen as under the noetic (mind) impact of sin and fallenness. Yet, also in Reformed thinking, the unregenerate/unsaved person can make valid contributions to society, culture, the arts, research, science, and more. How can these two truths be held together at one time? The Reformed doctrine of “common grace” explains this…and explains why it is possible for Christians to learn from non-Christians. Today’s post begins a series of post on a Reformed theology of common grace, focusing today on summary statements from seven Reformed theologians.

#1: John Calvin 

The reformer, John Calvin, insisted that it is the Spirit of God who establishes all human competence in arts and sciences “for the common good of mankind” and that common grace is a tool given by God that should not be neglected. In the Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin taught that the Bible draws a distinction between God’s special or saving grace and His common or non-saving grace. Calvin described the capacity for goodness in the non-Christian as a gift from God. He said that an unbelieving mind:

“Though fallen and perverted from its wholeness, is nevertheless clothed and ornamented with God’s excellent gifts” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.2.15).

Regarding “understanding,” Calvin wrote:

“When we so condemn human understanding for its perpetual blindness as to leave it no perception of any object whatever, we not only go against God’s Word, but also run counter to the experience of common sense” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.12).

While a weakened human understanding stumbles around, according to Calvin:

“Its efforts do not always become so worthless as to have no effect, especially when it turns its attention to things below” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13).

Here, Calvin hints at the distinction that clarifies much of his thinking on this subject. He then explained himself more fully:

“To perceive more clearly how far the mind can proceed in any matter according to the degree of its ability, we must here set forth a distinction. This, then, is the distinction: that there is one kind of understanding of earthly things; another of heavenly” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13). (Note: Among “earthly things” Calvin includes government, household management, mechanical skills, and the liberal arts and sciences. Among the “heavenly things” are the pure knowledge of God, the nature of true righteousness, and the mysteries of the kingdom (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.13).

According to Calvin, despite the Fall, unbelievers can come to a knowledge of earthly things, and he provides numerous examples. Regarding knowledge of the sciences, he wrote:

“Those men whom Scripture (1 Corinthians 2:14) calls ‘natural men’ were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior things” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.15).

In the next section, he continued along the same lines, even more forcefully admonishing Christians not to neglect the scientific studies of the ungodly:

“But if the Lord has willed that we be helped in physics, dialectic, mathematics, and other like disciplines, by the work and ministry of the ungodly, let us use this assistance. For if we neglect God’s gift freely offered in these arts, we ought to suffer just punishment for our sloths” (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.16).

Similarly, Calvin made a startling case, in his Institutes (Beveridge ed.), 2.2.15–16, for Christians availing themselves of “the work and ministry of the ungodly”:

“Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us that the human mind, however much fallen and perverted from its original integrity, is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its Creator. If we reflect that the Spirit of God is the only fountain of truth, we will be careful, as we would avoid offering insult to him, not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears…. If the Lord has been pleased to assist us by the work and ministry of the ungodly in physics, dialectics, mathematics, and other similar sciences, let us avail ourselves of it.”

#2: Abraham Kuyper

Abraham Kuyper defined common grace as:

“That act of God by which negatively He curbs the operations of Satan, death, and sin, and by which positively He creates an intermediate state for this cosmos, as well as for our human race, which is and continues to be deeply and radically sinful, but in which sin cannot work out its end” (see Principles of Sacred Theology, 279).

Kuyper added:

“God is glorified in the total development toward which human life and power over nature gradually march on under the guardianship of ‘common grace.’ It is His created order, His work, that unfold here. It was He who seeded the field of humanity with all these powers. Without a ‘Common Grace’ the seed which lay hidden in that field would never have come up and blossomed. Thanks to ‘Common Grace,’ it germinated, burgeoned, shot up high and will one day be in full flower, to reward not man but the heavenly Farmer. . . . A finished world will glorify God as builder and supreme Craftsman. What paradise was in bud will appear in full bloom.

#3: John Murray

John Murray provided this succinct definition of common grace:

Common grace “is every favour of whatever kind or degree, falling short of salvation, which this undeserving and sin-cursed world enjoys at the hand of God” (“Common Grace,” in the Collected Writings of John Murray, II:96).

Murray then developed common grace further, noting that through it, God endows men and women with gifts, talents, and opportunities they don’t deserve. God grants them:

“Gifts, talents, and aptitudes; he stimulates them with interest and purpose to the practice of virtues, the pursuance of worthy tasks, and the cultivation of arts and sciences that occupy the time, activity and energy of men and that make for the benefit and civilization of the human race. He ordains institutions for the protection and promotion of right, the preservation of liberty, the advance of knowledge and the improvement of physical and moral conditions. We may regard these interests, pursuits and institutions as exercising both an expulsive and impulsive influence. Occupying the energy, activity and time of men they prevent the indulgence of less noble and ignoble pursuits and they exercise an ameliorating, moralizing, stabilizing and civilizing influence upon the social organism (“Common Grace,” in the Collected Writings of John Murray, II:102–03).

 #4: John Frame

 John Frame, in his book The Doctrine of the Christian Life, writes that:

“…unbelievers are able to do things that look good to us. They don’t look good to God, for God knows the heart. But they look good to us, and they often bring benefits to society. So non-Christians often improve society through their skills and ideas. They make scientific discoveries, produce labor-saving inventions, develop businesses that supply jobs, produce works of art and entertainment.

 #5: Charles Hodge

 Charles Hodge, 19^th century Reformed theologian, described common grace as:

“The Holy Spirit as the Spirit of truth, of holiness, and of life in all its forms, is present with every human mind, enforcing truth, restraining from evil, exciting to good, and imparting wisdom or strength, when, where, and in what measure seemeth to Him good … This is what in theology is called common grace” (see Systematic Theology, II:667).

#6: Tim Keller

The Apostle James wrote, “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows” (James 1:17). Referring to this passage, Tim Keller writes in his book The Reason for God:

“This means that no matter who performs it, every act of goodness, wisdom, justice, and beauty is empowered by God. God gives out good gifts of wisdom, talent, beauty, and skill “graciously”— that is, in a completely unmerited way. He casts them across all humanity, regardless of religious conviction, race, gender, or any other attribute to enrich, brighten, and preserve the world” (Keller, The Reason for God, 53).

#7: R.C. Sproul

After stating that the church’s understanding of special revelation had been corrected by students of natural revelation, R. C. Sproul illustrated his point with a reference to the introduction of new astronomical ideas in the sixteenth century.

“Both Calvin and Luther rejected Copernicus as a heretic in the 16th century. I don’t know anybody in orthodox Christianity today who’s pleading for geocentricity. Do you? Do you know anybody? In that case the church has said, ‘Look, we misinterpreted the teaching of the Bible with respect to the solar system, and thank you scientists for correcting our misunderstanding.’ And so I think that we can learn from nonbelieving scientists who are studying natural revelation. They may get a better sense of the truth from their study of natural revelation than I get from ignoring natural revelation. So I have a high view of natural revelation is what I’m saying” (Luther, Calvin, and Copernicus: A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture). (Note: This quote is technically less specifically related to “common grace” and more specifically related to “natural revelation”—which is able to be studied because of common grace.)

Addendum: #8—Cornelius Van Til 

Cornelius Van Til, the man on whose work many biblical counselors base their epistemology, had a strong view of total depravity, the noetic effect of sin on the unregenerate mind, and of the role of God’s sovereign use of common grace. Ponder Van Til’s thinking from his work, A Survey of Christian Epistemology, 1969, p. 22:

“As far as the principle of interpretation is concerned, the natural man makes himself the final point of reference. So far then, as he carries through this principle, he interprets all things without God. In principle he is hostile to God. But he cannot carry through his principle completely. He is restrained by God from doing so. Being restrained by God from doing so, he is enabled to make contributions to the edifice of human knowledge. The forces of creative power implanted in him are to some extent released by God’s common grace. He therefore makes positive contributions to science in spite of his principles and because both he and the universe are the exact opposite of what he, by his principles thinks they are.”

Join the Conversation

 The preceding quotes are from just two hours of searching this morning. There is much more written by Reformed thinkers on “common grace.” So…

What quotes would you add from Reformed thinkers/theologians on “common grace”?