Christianity has no epistemological problem because it begins with a God who is there, an infinite-personal God who has made man in His own image. What we find is that in the Bible the answer rests upon language—the language of revelation. We will explore this in the next article. The amazing thing is that Heidegger and Wittgenstein, the two big names in the area of modern epistemology, both see that the answer is going to be in the area of language, but they have no one there to speak. Only Christianity has the solution to the problem of epistemology which modern man so desperately needs.

MODERN MAN: THE LOSS OF CATEGORIES

This is what has happened to those who have been raised in the last couple of decades. The really great problem is not, for example, just drugs or amorality. The problem is knowing. This is a generation of antiphilosophy, people caught in a live form of uncertainty of knowing. The problem of modern man is this: In the downstairs area he ascribes to rationality and talks with meaningful language. Still, here he can only see himself as a machine, a totally determined machine, and has no way to be sure of knowing even the natural world. But in the area of the upstairs nonrationality, modern man is completely without categories, for categories are always related to reason and antithesis.

Four groups of categories are lost or involved here: moral categories, human categories, the categories which separate reality and fantasy, and the categories necessary to really know other people. In the area of morals, man has no way to say this is right as opposed to this being non-right in the upstairs. But notice, it is more profound and more horrible, a very special kind of modern hell, living upstairs he has no way to say this is true as opposed to that which is non-true. Don’t you feel the desperation? This means that he has no control (and I use the word control with the French meaning—control as the possibility of checking something). It is impossible to have controls outside the area of reason.

Antonioni’s film “Blow Up” is an example of this. The posters advertising Antonioni’s film announced “Murder without guilt; love without meaning.” In other words, there are no categories in the area of morals—murder is without guilt; but equally there are no categories in the area of the human realm—love is without meaning. So Antonioni pictured the death of categories.

In this area of morality, there is no universal above; we are left only with particulars. That is all rationalistic man can do for himself. And all the way back to the Greeks, we have for two thousand years the brainiest men who ever lived trying to find a way to put meaning and certainty of knowledge into the area of rationalistic man. But man beginning with himself and with no other knowledge outside of himself is a total failure.

The modern cinema and other art forms go beyond the loss of human and moral categories. They point out quite properly that if you have no place for categories, you also lose any categories which would distinguish between reality and fantasy. Now we are really in the world of your children. There are no categories in this upper area, so eventually there is no category to distinguish the difference between reality and fantasy.

The drug culture enters into this, too. In the very heart of the drug culture is the loss of distinction between reality and fantasy by the taking of drugs. But even if modern man does not take drugs, modern man has no categories once he has moved out of the lower area. Downstairs he is already dead, he is only a machine, and none of these things have any meaning. But as soon as he moves upstairs into the mystical, all that is left is a place with no categories with which to distinguish the inner world from the outer world with any certainty whatsoever.

Modern man’s uncertainty about knowing has also left him with a problem in terms of knowing another person. How can two people meeting each other know each other, and how can they know that they know each other? How are there any categories to enable a person to move into another person’s thought world? This is modern man’s alienation—the feeling of total alienation. They can sleep together for ten years, fifteen years, it makes no difference. It is easy to know a language machine, but how can you get behind the language and know the other person? This is a very special form of lostness.

Modern man is left either downstairs as a machine with words that do not lead either to values or facts but only to words, or upstairs in a world without categories in regard to human values, moral values, or the difference between reality and fantasy. Cry for our generation. Man made in the image of God was meant to be in vertical communication with the One who is there and who is not silent, and to have horizontal communication with his own kind. Modern man because of his proud rationalism, making himself autonomous, has come to this place of horrible silence.

Christianity has no epistemological problem because it begins with a God who is there, an infinite-personal God who has made man in His own image. What we find is that in the Bible the answer rests upon language—the language of revelation. We will explore this in the next article. The amazing thing is that Heidegger and Wittgenstein, the two big names in the area of modern epistemology, both see that the answer is going to be in the area of language, but they have no one there to speak. Only Christianity has the solution to the problem of epistemology which modern man so desperately needs.

The testimony of the Holy Spirit is therefore, strictly speaking, not so much the final ground of faith, but rather the means of faith. The final ground of faith is Scripture only, or better still, the authority of God which is impressed upon the believer in the testimony of Scripture. The ground of faith is identical with its contents, and cannot be separated from it. But the testimony of the Holy Spirit is the moving cause of faith. We believe Scripture, not because of, but through the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

III. THE RELATION BETWEEN THE HOLY SPIRIT AND SCRIPTURE

It is the conclusion of recent Reformation scholarship that in the Churches of the Reformation the Holy Spirit is associated pre-eminently with the means of grace, of which the first and foremost is the Word. Both Luther and Calvin stressed the role of the Spirit with reference to the Scriptures. Luther affirmed:

I believe that it is not of my own reason or by my own strength that I believe in Jesus Christ my Lord; it is the Holy Ghost that by the Gospel has called me, with His gifts has enlightened me, through genuine faith has sanctified and sustained me, just as He calls, gathers together, enlightens, sanctifies, and sustains by Jesus Christ, in true faith, all Christendom. (Cat. Min., Art. III).

Calvin spoke of the Holy Spirit as the “bond by which Christ efficaciously binds us to Himself,” creating faith “by which the believer receives Christ; where the Spirit illumines to faith, Christ inserts us within His body and we become partakers of all goods.” (Institutes, Bk. III; Chapt. 1, #1, 4, Chapt. 2, #35). The internal testimony of the Holy Spirit (testimonium spiritus sancti interna) confines His persuasion to the truth of Scripture.

Thus, being illumined by His power, we believe, not on the strength of our own judgment or that of others, that Scripture is from God; we establish it with a certainty superior to human judgment (just as if we actually beheld the presence of God Himself in it) that Scripture came to us, by the ministry of men, from the very mouth of God. (Institutes, Bk. I, Chapt. 7, #4).

Traditionally this was taken to mean that the Reformers were saying that the Holy Spirit confirms to the reader that the words of Scripture are the very words of God, at least this is what Protestant orthodoxy of the seventeenth century understood Luther and Calvin to mean. Numerous modern theologians are saying that all the Reformers were doing was insisting that the official interpretation the church had placed on Scripture could be wrong and that the same Spirit who inspired the writings was free to interpret them afresh in their day. Thus Hendry writes:

For the Reformers … the testimony of the Holy Spirit was related primarily to the efficacy of the Word, i.e., to the power of its content to communicate itself as living reality to the hearer or reader. They were not interested in the form in which this content was to be found in Scripture because its power to communicate itself proved it to be essentially incommensurable with form. (pp. 90–91).

The Scriptures, he goes on to say, were not written to draw attention to themselves but their appeal is the testimony to Jesus Christ and the Gospel of God, which is the finished work of His Incarnate Life, which is also the appeal of the Holy Spirit. He objects to the view that the Scripture is the only means through which the Gospel is conveyed, as if it existed in a vacuum.

The testimony of the Spirit in the Word is registered, not in any properties of the Scriptural record, but where the Church receives the testimony of the Word and repeats it in the testimony of its own faith.… This point is the presence of the living Lord in the power of His finished work. The testimony of Scripture and the testimony of the Church are instrumental to it; but they cannot effect it—least of all by the advancement of exalted claims on behalf of either of them. The doctrine of the testimony of the Holy Spirit makes all such claims redundant; for it means that, despite the frailty and fallibility of the Church, despite the errancy of Scripture, nevertheless the living Lord makes Himself known to us through their testimony. They are means of grace but the grace is that of the Lord Jesus Christ, which proceeds from the love of God and is imparted to us in the communion of the Holy Spirit, p. 95).

Recognizing the centrality of the testimony of the Spirit, but seeing it as a witness to the divinity of the Scripture, thus following the precedent set by the Reformers, Bernard Ramm speaks of a pattern of authority—a blend of objective (Scripture) and subjective (Holy Spirit) factors.

Christ is the supreme object of the witness of the Spirit, and Christ is the supreme content of the Scriptures. The Spirit who bears His chief witness to Christ also inspired the Scriptures. The Scriptures are inspired of the Spirit and they witness supremely to Christ, the personal Word of God. Such is the pattern of authority, and the three elements of it must be held in proper relationship. (The Pattern of Authority, p 37, italics mine.)

In his latest book, The Witness of the Holy Spirit, Prof. Ramm, after discussing Luther and Calvin on this point, demonstrates that the work of the Holy Spirit cannot, be discussed in isolation from the total area of Christian theology but must be related to the doctrine of the Trinity, revelation, redemption, Scripture, Christian fellowship and the spiritual life.

CONCLUSION

In these modern approaches to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit we have seen attempts to correlate human questions and experiences with theological or religious answers. While this is certainly a commendable and significant endeavor, not without considerable Biblical precedent and example, bringing meaning and understanding through analogy, metaphor, parable, etc., it has the weakness of truncating and limiting the scope and breadth of that to which it points while perhaps increasing the depth of one facet of it. In other words, there is always more richness, complexity, and dimension to the Holy Spirit than is suggested by any particular avenue, significant as it may be, which leads us to consider Him. Another way of putting this might be to say that Revelation not only answers the questions man’s existential, situation poses but it also carries with it some questions of its own, questions man needs to raise but cannot, and to these as well it supplies theological or religious answers.

The Internal Testimony

The thesis maintained above in our examination of the objective witness is that Scripture is authoritative by reason of the character it possesses as the infallible Word of God and that this divine quality belongs to Scripture because it is the product of God’s creative breath through the mode of plenary inspiration by the Holy Spirit. The rejection of such a position has appeared to many to involve no impairment of the divine authority of the Bible because, even though the infallibility of Scripture has to be abandoned, there still remains the ever abiding and active witness of the Holy Spirit, and so infallible authority is fully conserved in the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. Scripture is authoritative, it is said, because it is borne home to the man of faith by the internal testimony of the Spirit.

That there is such an activity of the Holy Spirit as the internal testimony is beyond dispute, and that there is no true faith in Scripture as the Word of God apart from such inward testimony is likewise fully granted. It might seem, therefore, that it belongs to the very situation in which we are placed, relative to the Holy Spirit, to say that the divine authority that confronts us is not that emanating from a past and finished activity of the Spirit but rather the influence of the Spirit which is now operative with reference to and in us. Does not the positing of divine authority in an activity of the Spirit that to us is impersonal and external, as well as far distant and now inactive, do prejudice to the real meaning of that directly personal and presently operative address of the Holy Spirit to us and in us?

This question is that which defines what is the most important cleavage within Protestantism today. It is the cleavage between what is called Barthianism and the historic Protestant position. The Barthian view is that Scripture is authoritative because it witnesses to the Word of God; it is the vessel or vehicle of the Word of God to us. In that respect Scripture is said to be unique, and in that sense it is called the Word of God. But what makes Scripture really authoritative, on this view, is the ever-recurring act of God, the divine decision, whereby, through the mediacy of Scripture, the witness of Scripture to the Word of God is borne home to us with ruling and compelling power. The Scripture is not authoritative antecedently and objectively. It is only authoritative as here and now, to this man and to no other, in a concrete crisis and confrontation, God reveals himself through the medium of Scripture. Only as there is the ever-recurring human crisis and divine decision does the Bible become the Word of God.

It is apparent, therefore, that for the Barthian the authority-imparting factor is not Scripture as an existing corpus of truth given by God to man by a process of revelation and inspiration in past history, not the divine quality and character which Scripture inherently possesses, but something else that must be distinguished from any past action and from any resident quality. The issue must not be obscured. Barth does not hold and cannot hold that Scripture possesses binding and ruling authority by reason of what it is objectively, inherently, and qualitatively.

An objection to this way of stating the matter is easily anticipated. It is that this sharp antithesis is indefensible. For, after all, it will be said, Scripture is unique. It is the Word of God because it bears witness to God’s Word. It occupies a unique category because there was something unique and distinctive about that past activity by which it came to be. It differs radically from other books written at the time of its production and also from all other books. It can, therefore, have no authority in abstraction from that quality that belongs to it as the human witness to the revelation given by God in the past. So, it may be argued, the factor arising from past events and activities enters into the whole complex of factors that combine and converge to invest Scripture with that unique character which makes it the fit medium for the ever-recurring act of divine revelation. It is not then an either or but a both and.

The objection is appreciated and welcomed. But it does not eliminate the issue. After making allowance for all that is argued in support of the objection, there still remains the fact that, on Barthian presuppositions, it is not the divine quality inherent in Scripture nor the divine activity by which that quality has been imparted to it that makes Scripture authoritative. That past activity and the resultant quality may constitute the prerequisites for the authority by which it becomes ever and anon invested, but they do not constitute that authority. It is rather the ever-recurring act of God that is the authority-constituting fact. This ever-recurring activity of God may be conceived of as the internal testimony of the Spirit, and so it is this testimony that constitutes Scripture authoritative.13

It is sometimes supposed that this Barthian construction of the authority of Scripture represents the classic Protestant or indeed Reformed position. Even the Westminster Confession has been appealed to as enunciating this position when it says that “our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts” (I:V). A little examination of chapter I of the Confession will expose the fallacy of this appeal. Indeed, the Westminster Confession was framed with a logic and comprehension exactly adapted not only to obviate but also to meet the Barthian conception. Section V, from which the above quotation was given, does not deal with the nature or ground of the authority of Scripture. The preceding section deals with that logically prior question. It states clearly that the authority of Scripture resides in the fact that it is the Word of God. “The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.” In one word, Scripture is authoritative because God is its author, and he is its author because, as is stated in Section II, it was given by inspiration of God. Nothing could be plainer than this: that the Confession represents the authority of Scripture as resting not upon the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit but upon the inspiration of the Spirit, a finished activity by which, it is clearly stated, the sixty-six books enumerated were produced and in virtue of which they are the Word of God written.

It is, however, by “the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts” that we become convinced of that authority. The authority of Scripture is an objective and permanent fact residing in the quality of inspiration; the conviction on our part has to wait for that inward testimony by which the antecedent facts of divinity and authority are borne in upon our minds and consciences. It is to confuse the most important and eloquent of distinctions to represent the former as consisting in the latter. The Confession has left no room for doubt as to what its position is, and in formulating the matter with such clarity it has expressed the classic Reformed conception.

What then is the nature of this internal testimony, and what is the scriptural basis upon which the doctrine rests?

If, as has been shown in the earlier part of this discussion, Scripture is divine in its origin, character, and authority, it must bear the marks or evidences of that divinity. If the heavens declare the glory of God and therefore bear witness to their divine Creator, the Scripture as God’s handiwork must also bear the imprints of his authorship. This is just saying that Scripture evidences itself to be the Word of God; its divinity is self-evidencing and self-authenticating. The ground of faith in Scripture as the Word of God is therefore the evidence it inherently contains of its divine authorship and quality. External evidence, witness to its divinity derived from other sources extraneous to itself, may corroborate and confirm the witness it inherently contains, but such external evidence cannot be in the category of evidence sufficient to ground and constrain faith. If the faith is faith in the Bible as God’s Word, obviously the evidence upon which such faith rests must itself have the quality of divinity. For only evidence with the quality of divinity would be sufficient to ground a faith in divinity. Faith in Scripture as God’s Word, then, rests upon the perfections inherent in Scripture and is elicited by the perception of these perfections. These perfections constitute its incomparable excellence, and such excellence when apprehended constrains the overwhelming conviction that is the only appropriate kind of response.

If Scripture thus manifests itself to be divine, why is not faith the result in the case of everyone confronted with it? The answer is that not all men have the requisite perceptive faculty. Evidence is one thing; the ability to perceive and understand is another. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14). It is here that the necessity for the internal testimony of the Spirit enters. The darkness and depravity of man’s mind by reason of sin make man blind to the divine excellence of Scripture. And the effect of sin is not only that it blinds the mind of man and makes it impervious to the evidence but also that it renders the heart of man utterly hostile to the evidence. The carnal mind is enmity against God and therefore resists every claim of the divine perfection. If the appropriate response of faith is to be yielded to the divine excellence inherent in Scripture, nothing less than radical regeneration by the Holy Spirit can produce the requisite susceptibility. “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:14). It is here that the internal testimony of the Spirit enters, and it is in the inward work of the Holy Spirit upon the heart and mind of man that the internal testimony consists. The witness of Scripture to the depravity of man’s mind and to the reality, nature, and effect of the inward work of the Holy Spirit is the basis upon which the doctrine of the internal testimony rests.

When Paul institutes the contrast between the natural man and the spiritual and says with respect to the latter, “But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no one” (1 Cor. 2:15), he means that the “spiritual” person is the person endowed with and indwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is only such a one who has the faculty to discern the things revealed by the Spirit. By way of contrast with the natural man, he receives, knows, and discerns the truth.

Earlier in this same chapter Paul tells us in terms that even more pointedly deal with our present subject that the faith of the Corinthians in the gospel was induced by the demonstration of the Spirit and of power. “And my speech and my preaching was not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, in order that your faith might not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God” (1 Cor. 2:4–5). No doubt Paul here is reflecting upon the manner of his preaching. It was not with the embellishments of human oratory that he preached the gospel but with that demonstration or manifestation that is produced by the Spirit and power of God. He is saying, in effect, that the Spirit of God so wrought in him and in his preaching that the response on the part of the Corinthians was the solid faith which rests upon the power of God and not that evanescent faith which depends upon the appeal of rhetorical art and worldly wisdom. It is in the demonstration of which the Holy Spirit is the author that the faith of the Corinthians finds its source. It is, indeed, faith terminating upon the Word of God preached by Paul. But it is faith produced by the accompanying demonstration of the Spirit and manifestation of divine power.

In the first epistle to the Thessalonians Paul again refers to the power and confidence with which he and his colleagues preached the gospel at Thessalonica. “For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and much assurance” (1 Thess. 1:5). In this text the reference to power and assurance appears to apply to the power and confidence with which Paul and Silvanus and Timothy proclaimed the Word rather than to the conviction with which it was received by the Thessalonians. The gospel came in the Holy Spirit and therefore with power and assurance. But we must not dissociate the reception of the Word on the part of the Thessalonians from this power and confidence wrought by the Spirit. For Paul proceeds, “And ye became imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction with joy of the Holy Spirit” (v. 6). The resulting faith on the part of the Thessalonians must be regarded as proceeding from this activity of the Holy Spirit in virtue of which the gospel was proclaimed “in power and in the Holy Spirit and much assurance.” That the Thessalonians became imitators of the Lord and received the Word with joy is due to the fact that the gospel came not in word only, and it came not in word only because it came in the power of the Holy Spirit. Their faith therefore finds its source in this demonstration of the Spirit, just as the joy with which they received the Word is the joy wrought by the Spirit.

When the apostle John writes, “And ye have an anointing from the Holy One and ye know all things. I have not written to you because ye do not know the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth” (1 John 2:20–21; cf. v. 27), he is surely alluding to that same indwelling of the Spirit with which Paul deals in 1 Corinthians 2:15. This anointing is an abiding possession and invests believers with discernment of the truth and steadfastness in it.

Summing up the conclusions drawn from these few relevant passages, we may say that the reception of the truth of God in intelligent, discriminating, joyful, and abiding faith is the effect of divine demonstration and power through the efficiency of the Holy Spirit, and that this faith consists in the confident assurance that, though the Word of God is brought through the instrumentality of men, it is not the word of man but in very truth the Word of God. We again see how even in connection with the internal testimony of the Spirit, the ministry of men in no way militates against the reception of their message as the Word of God.

This witness of the Holy Spirit has been called the internal “testimony” of the Spirit. The question arises, why is the inward work of the Spirit called testimony? There does not appear, indeed, to be any compelling reason why it should be thus called. There is, however, an appropriateness in the word. The faith induced by this work of the Spirit rests upon the testimony the Scripture inherently contains of its divine origin and character. It is the function of the Holy Spirit to open the minds of men to perceive that testimony and cause the Word of God to be borne home to the mind of man with ruling power and conviction. Thereby the Holy Spirit may be said to bear perpetual witness to the divine character of that which is his own handiwork.

The internal testimony of the Spirit has frequently been construed as consisting in illumination or in regeneration on its noëtic side. It is illumination because it consists in the opening of our minds to behold the excellence that inheres in Scripture as the Word of God. It is regeneration on the noëtic side because it is regeneration coming to its expression in our understanding in the response of the renewed mind to the evidence Scripture contains of its divine character. Anything less than illumination in the sense defined above, the internal testimony cannot be.

The question may properly be raised, however, whether or not the notion of illumination is fully adequate as an interpretation of the nature of this testimony. On the view that it consists merely in illumination, the testimony, most strictly considered, resides entirely in the Scripture itself and not at all in the ever-present activity of the Spirit. And the question is, may we not properly regard the present work of the Spirit as not only imparting to us an understanding to perceive the evidence inhering in the Scripture but also as imparting what is of the nature of positive testimony? If we answer in the affirmative, then we should have to say that the power and demonstration with which the Holy Spirit accompanies the Word and by which it is carried home to our hearts and minds with irresistible conviction is the ever-continuing positive testimony of the Spirit. In other words, the seal of the Spirit belongs to the category of testimony strictly considered. If this construction should be placed upon the power and seal of the Spirit, there is a very obvious reason why this doctrine should be called, not only appropriately but necessarily, the internal “testimony” of the Spirit. We must, however, be content to leave this question undetermined. It should not perplex us to do so. There remains in this matter as in the other manifold activities of the Holy Spirit much of mystery that surpasses our understanding.

Whether we view the internal testimony as merely illumination or as illumination plus a positive supplementation construed as testimony in the stricter sense of the word, there is one principle which it is necessary to stress, namely, that the internal testimony does not convey to us new truth content. The whole truth content that comes within the scope of the internal testimony is contained in the Scripture. This testimony terminates upon the end of constraining belief in the divine character and authority of the Word of God and upon that end alone. It gives no ground whatsoever for new revelations of the Spirit.

When Paul writes to the Thessalonians, “Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and much assurance,” he is surely making a distinction between the actual content of the gospel and the attendant power with which it was conveyed to them and in virtue of which it was carried home with conviction to the hearts of the Thessalonians. In like manner, in 1 Corinthians 2:4–5 the content of Paul’s word and preaching will surely have to be distinguished from the demonstration of the Spirit and of power by which Paul’s message was effectual in the begetting of faith in the Corinthian believers. And we are likewise justified in recognising a distinction between the truth which John says his readers already knew and the abiding anointing of the Spirit which provided them with the proper knowledge and discernment to the end of bringing to clearer consciousness and consistent application the truth which they had already received (1 John 2:20–27). In each case the illumining and sealing function of the Spirit has respect to truth which had been received from another source than that of his confirming and sealing operations.

The internal testimony of the Spirit is the necessary complement to the witness Scripture inherently bears to its plenary inspiration. The two pillars of true faith in Scripture as God’s Word are the objective witness and the internal testimony. The objective witness furnishes us with a conception of Scripture that provides the proper basis for the ever-active sealing operation of the Spirit of truth. The internal testimony insures that this objective witness elicits the proper response in the human consciousness. The sealing function of the Spirit finds its complete explanation and validation in the pervasive witness that Scripture bears to its own divine origin and authority. And the witness to plenary inspiration receives its constant confirmation in the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in the hearts of believers.

THE HOLY SPIRIT IN RELATION TO THE UNSAVED WORLD

BY JOHN F. WALVOORD, TH.D.*

(Continued from the January–March Number, 1941)

Introduction

The doctrines of providence and of the sovereignty of God demand that the power of God be effective not only in the saved but also in the unsaved world. While the ministry of the Holy Spirit is ever primarily directed toward the Christian, it is evident that He is working in the world as well, bringing to pass the will of the Father and the Son. The Scriptures reveal that it is characteristic of the Holy Spirit to minister in scenes of disorder and sin. The chaos of the primeval earth as described in Genesis 1:2 was not without His presence. The wicked generation of Noah’s day was opposed in its mad course by the striving of the Spirit (Gen. 6:3). The degeneracy of the period of the Judges had its Samson who was empowered by the Holy Spirit. The prophets of the period of Israel’s decadence before the captivities were living examples of the power of the Holy Spirit to minister in the midst of sin and unbelief. We are reminded in the New Testament that God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). It should therefore be expected that the Holy Spirit should have a special ministry to the unsaved world in every age, particularly in the age of grace during which the Holy Spirit is resident in the world in the Church.

The ministry of the Holy Spirit in relation to the unsaved world falls into two categories which are not necessarily independent. The Holy Spirit is given the ministry of resisting evil and restraining the world in its manifestation. To the Holy Spirit, also, is committed the task of making known the way of salvation to a race which has no natural capacity to receive it with understanding. Most of the attention of theologians during the Christian centuries has been directed to the latter ministry, that of revealing the message of salvation to the lost and providing enablement for saving faith. The ministry of the Holy Spirit in restraining sin in the world is most important, however, though few direct references are found in Scripture.

The work of the Holy Spirit in relation to the unsaved world is most important for a number of reasons. In view of the power of Satan and his evident hatred of Christians and the truth, the work of the Holy Spirit in restraining sin is required to explain the relative freedom allowed the Christian in the world and the preservation of those conditions which make possible the preaching of the Gospel and the maintenance of some order in the sinful world. The work of the Holy Spirit in revealing the Gospel to the lost is essential to the whole program of completing the purpose of God to call out the Church in this age. It provides for the inability of man and makes possible the salvation of souls. The doctrine is, therefore, important in its significance and necessary to a full appreciation of proper Gospel preaching.

I. THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN RESTRAINING SIN

1. The Restraining Work of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament

The work of the Holy Spirit in restraining the world from sin is found in every age, except during the period of unprecedented sinfulness during the great tribulation, when it is God’s purpose to demonstrate for the first time what unrestrained sin is. The character of this work of restraining sin varies slightly in different ages, however. In the previous discussion of this work of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament,1 it was shown that the Holy Spirit undertook to restrain sin throughout the Old Testament period. The striving of the Holy Spirit against sin in Noah’s period is definitely stated (Gen. 6:3). While Isaiah 59:19 is not as clear a reference, it infers a similar ministry of the Holy Spirit. The many other ministries of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament tended to restrain sin. His work in revealing truth through the prophets, particularly the warnings of judgment to come, and the work of inspiration of the Scriptures with their power helped to restrain sin. The judgments which followed rejection of His striving against sin (Isa. 63:10–11) had their effect. The presence and power of the Holy Spirit by virtue of His holy character was conducive to restraint of sin. Throughout the Old Testament, then, the power of the Holy Spirit guided human events into the path of divine providence.

2. The Restraining Work of the Holy Spirit in the Present Age

The work of the Holy Spirit in restraining sin as found in the Old Testament continues in the present age. Further confirmation of His ministry is found in 2 Thessalonians 2:7, “For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way” (American Standard Version). The subject of the passage is the coming day of the Lord in which the man of sin will be revealed (2 Thess. 2:3). According to the passage, the man of sin will not be revealed until the one who restrains is removed. The present age enjoys the ministry of this restrainer whose presence and ministry make impossible the manifestation of the man of sin. The question concerning the identity of this one who restrains sin, in the light of the Old Testament, is easily settled by referring it to the Holy Spirit.

Interpreters of Scripture have not all agreed on the identity of the one restraining lawlessness. A popular view of this passage is that human government is this restraining force. Human government, however, continues during the period of tribulation in which the man of sin is revealed. While all forces of law and order tend to restrain sin, they are not such in their own character, but rather as they are used and empowered to accomplish this end by God. It would seem a preferable interpretation to view all restraint of sin, regardless of means, as proceeding from God as a ministry of the Holy Spirit. As Dr. Thiessen writes: “But who is the one that restraineth? Denney, Findlay, Alford, Moffatt, hold that this refers to law and order, especially as embodied in the Roman Empire. But while human governments may be agencies in the restraining work of the Spirit, we believe that they in turn are influenced by the Church. And again, back of human government is God Who instituted it (Gen. 9:5, 6; Rom. 13:1–7) and controls it (Ps. 75:5–7). So it is God by His Spirit that restrains the development of lawlessness.”2

Some have advanced another view which contends that Satan himself is restraining sin lest it manifest its true character. This idea is hardly compatible with the revelation of Satan found in the Scriptures. Satan is nowhere given universal power over the world, though his influence is inestimable. A study of 2 Thessalonians 2:3–10 indicates that the one who restrains is removed from the scene before the man of sin is revealed. This could hardly be said of Satan. The period of tribulation on the contrary is one in which Satan’s work is most evident. The Scriptures represent him as being cast into the earth and venting his fury during those tragic days (Rev. 12:9). The theory that Satan is the great restrainer of lawlessness is, accordingly, untenable.

If it be conceded that the Holy Spirit undertook to strive with men to restrain sin in the Old Testament, it is even more evident that a similar ministry will be found in the present age in which the Spirit is present in the Church. While it is not in the purpose of God to deal finally with the world while the Church is in the world, the sovereignty of God overrules the wickedness of men and the power of Satan to make possible the accomplishment of His purpose to call out a people to His name. While the restraining hand of the Holy Spirit is little realized by the church at large, His protection and power shield the Christian from the impossible task of living in a world in which sin is unrestrained.

3. Contributing Factors in the Work of Restraining Sin

The Scriptures do not enlarge upon the ministry of the Holy Spirit in restraining sin. Reason would point, however, to a number of contributing factors all of which are used of God to check the course of sin. The presence of the individual Christian, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, constitutes a force to hinder the world in its sin. The church corporately has done much to influence the world, even though it has failed to measure up to Biblical standards itself. The Bible, wherever it has gone, has produced its attendant effect not only on those who believed it but also indirectly has influenced the thought and action of the unsaved world. Human governments, ordained of God, are a means to divine ends. While these many factors in themselves are not the work of the Holy Spirit in restraining, they are means used by the Holy Spirit in accomplishing His purpose. The work of the Holy Spirit in restraining sin is seen, therefore, to be an important work of God, essential to divine providence, and a part of the work of God for His own.

II. THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT REVEALING THE GOSPEL TO THE UNSAVED

Introduction

The entire work of the Holy Spirit on behalf of the unsaved world is sometimes given the terminology common grace, including in its scope the restraining work of the Holy Spirit in addition to the work of revealing the Gospel. Charles Hodge, for instance, states in reference to common grace, “The Bible therefore teaches that 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 good.… This is what in theology is called common grace.”3 The work of the Holy Spirit revealing the Gospel to the unsaved is, therefore, an important aspect of a larger program of God in dealing with the need of a lost world. It is founded on a desperate need for enablement to understand the Gospel. It is designed to articulate the preaching of the Gospel and the plan of God to give a universal call to faith in Christ. It is antecedent to the effectual call of God to the elect. The doctrine of the work of the Holy Spirit in revealing the Gospel to the world is most important not only in its relation to the plan of God but also in carrying out effectively the preaching of the Gospel. The Christian desiring to win souls for Christ should study this subject carefully, for in it lie the principles which God has revealed concerning His methods of dealing with the lost.

1. Man’s Need of Grace

The fall of Adam was full of tremendous consequences. Because of it, sin was imputed to the race; men are spiritually dead apart from Christ; men possess a fallen nature which issues in manifestation; and, important to our present study, men are unable to comprehend the truth of God. The Scriptures bear constant witness to the inability of man. It is stated flatly in 1 Corinthians 2:14, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him.” Again in 1 Corinthians 1:18, the Gospel is declared to be foolishness to the lost, “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” The unsaved Gentiles are declared to walk in spiritual darkness, “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart” (Eph. 4:18). According to Romans 8:7, the natural mind is not capable of being subject to the law of God: “because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Christ bore witness to the inability of natural man to come to God when He said, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him” (John 6:44). In addition to natural inability is the work of Satan blinding the hearts of the lost to the light of the Gospel (2 Cor. 4:4). The condition of man is hopeless apart from divine intervention.

Inability on the part of man has its rise in ignorance of God and His grace due to corruption of man’s whole being, perversion of his sensations, feelings, and tastes, and blinding of his understanding. In the fall, man did not lose his moral determination. He is still accountable and relatively remains a free agent. He retains ability to understand natural things and may rise in this realm to unusual heights. Even his aversion to the good and inclination to the evil, while springing from his fallen nature, has its origin in his utter inability to appreciate the Person of God and the inherent loveliness of righteousness. The real reason for man’s hatred of God is his ignorance of what God is. The will of man, however, in itself has no power to transcend its natural ability as found after the fall any more than it had power to transcend its natural ability before the fall. Man in himself is utterly unable to understand the truth of God. The answer to the problem, therefore, is not found in any development of the natural man or cultivation of latent abilities, but is disclosed in the power of God as manifested in the work of the Holy Spirit. Apart from this work of the Holy Spirit, God would continue to be unrevealed to a lost race; the death of Christ would be inapplicable to men; and the purpose of God to save the elect would be impossible of fulfillment. The importance of this doctrine, therefore, justifies a careful study.

2. The Nature of Common Grace

The term common grace is a general one, as previously indicated, and has reference to the influence of the Holy Spirit upon the world. It has a special application, however, to the problem of the inability of man to receive the things of God. In this sense, common grace is a ministry of the Holy Spirit which reveals the truth of God to man whenever given in any form. Arminian theologians use a similar term, sufficient grace, by which they mean common grace of such character and extent as is sufficient to give adequate revelation for intelligent saving faith. Another term, efficacious grace, is in the same field of truth, but it is quite distinct in its character and operation. Efficacious grace is the ministry of the Holy Spirit which is certainly effectual in revealing the Gospel and in leading to saving faith. This aspect of grace will be considered under the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation.

a. Relation to the Word of God

The Scriptures affirm constantly the necessity of preaching the Word of God in reaching the lost. It is the Gospel which is “the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16), and men are urged to preach the Gospel to every creature. Accordingly, Paul raises the question, “How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?” (Rom. 10:14), and comes to the conclusion, “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). The Word of God is the divine means used to reveal God and His grace to the world, and it is the Word of God which is the sword of the Spirit. While God could, if He desired, reveal Himself through other channels, the way of salvation is made known to us through the Bible. Where the Scriptures have not been made known in one form or another, salvation is not found. It is significant, then, that those who desire to lead men to Christ must preach the Word of God.

The sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper have their place in bearing witness to the Gospel. While the importance of this means of revelation has undoubtedly been overemphasized by the church, these sacraments do reveal in symbol the Gospel message, and the Lord’s Supper in particular is to be observed because it shows “the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. 11:26).

In relating the Word of God to the doctrine of common grace, two extremes in doctrine may be observed. Lutheran theologians have overemphasized the living character of the Word of God (Heb. 4:12) to the point where it is claimed that the Bible has power in itself, and no attendant work of the Holy Spirit is necessary to make it effective. While the Lutheran church has fully supported the immanence and power of the Holy Spirit, they regard His work as being limited in some sense to the Word itself. As Charles Hodge summarizes the Lutheran position, “This divine efficacy is inherent in, and inseparable from the Word.”4 The chief difficulty with this view is the obvious fact that many unsaved men are completely unaffected by hearing or reading the Bible. Lutherans explain this by conditioning its power on their faith, but it is difficult to see how they can believe what they do not know and understand. If an unsaved man cannot understand before he believes, and is unable to believe what he does not understand, how can he ever be brought to saving faith? The fact remains that the Spirit of God brings conviction and understanding to many who never believe, who turn from the Gospel even after the way of salvation is made plain to them. The work of the Holy Spirit in revealing the Gospel to the unsaved is rather a sovereign operation of God, not conditioned upon the receptivity of man. The experience of many Christians bears witness to the possibility of understanding the issues of saving faith and at the same time being rebellious against God and unwilling to accept Christ for some time before the decision for Christ is finally made.

Another extreme in the doctrine of common grace is found in the viewpoint that the Word of God is unnecessary. While the Word of God is not necessarily related to the general works of God in restraining sin, in providence, and in acts of sovereignty, the revelation of the truth of the Gospel comes only through the Word of God. The extreme position which makes the Word of God unnecessary to common grace is supported by two opposite schools of theology, the rational and the mystic. Rationalism approaches the problem from many angles. The deists, of course, assume that God is not immanent in the world, and trace all spiritual experience to a normal process of human mind. To them the realm of common grace is purely a discovery of the human intelligence proceeding from natural causes. Less extreme than the deists is the Pelagian viewpoint, holding that man is inherently able to understand the truth and make his own decisions in relation to it. The rationalistic approach to the subject is diametrically opposed to the Scriptural revelation, and is not seriously considered by Reformed theologians.

The view of the mystics, of course, is quite the opposite of the rationalist. The mystic assumes that God gives direct revelation to all who will receive it, and that truth so given can be understood properly by the recipient. The view partakes of all the errors of false mysticism, going far beyond the relation of false mysticism to the Christian, and attributes even to the unsaved the power to receive special revelation and understand it. Genuine salvation is never found except among those who have heard the Word of God. Missionaries entering unevangelized fields never come upon a Christian community, or even an individual Christian. The view of the mystics is based on speculation rather than Scripture or experience, and must therefore be dismissed.

The work of the Holy Spirit in revealing the Gospel to the unsaved is peculiarly a ministry of enablement to understand the way of salvation. As the Word is preached, the Holy Spirit attends with power to make it known to those who naturally are blind to the truth and unable to comprehend it. The importance of this ministry of the Spirit must be recognized before the necessity of prayer for the lost can be realized.

b. The Extent of Revelation to the World

The work of the Holy Spirit in revealing truth to the world is specified as one of the primary reasons why the Holy Spirit is making His residence in the world in this age. According to the words of Christ, “And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment” (John 16:8). This threefold work of the Spirit is further defined in the passage which follows. The work of reproving or convincing the world of sin is given the specific character of revealing the one sin of unbelief as being the issue between the unsaved and God, as verse nine indicates, “Of sin, because they believe not on me.” Because of the death of Christ it is no longer a question of being condemned simply because of sin. The death of Christ is seen to satisfy all the righteous demands of God. To the unsaved, the determining factor in his destiny is whether he believes in Christ. Far removed from a character building program, or merely an encouragement to live more righteously, the Holy Spirit reveals that it is necessary to believe in Christ to be saved.

A second revelation of the Holy Spirit to the world is that of making known the righteousness of God. According to verse ten, this revelation is necessary because Christ is no longer bodily present in the earth, “Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.” While Christ was on earth, His presence and His teaching were a demonstration of the righteousness of God. When Christ ascended into heaven, it was necessary for the Holy Spirit to undertake this ministry. As a work for the unsaved, the Holy Spirit reveals the righteousness of God in two distinct aspects. First, the Holy Spirit reveals that we are dealing with a righteous God. It is not a question of conformity to any earthly standard or comparison. Our life is seen measured by the righteousness of the Person of God. Second, the Holy Spirit reveals to the unsaved that there is available through Christ an imputed righteousness which God gives the believer. It is no doubt true that many come to Christ in faith and are saved who comprehend very imperfectly the nature of this imputed righteousness. It is possible that many only understand vaguely that God through Christ cares for their unrighteousness without realizing all the wonders of justification. It is essential to intelligent faith, however, that the unsaved understand that through Christ it is possible for God to deal with them as those who are righteous. This revelation is inseparable from the Gospel.

A third revelation is given the unsaved by the Holy Spirit concerning the relation of the cross to judgment and Satan. Christ said the Holy Spirit would convict the world “Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged” (John 16:11). The Holy Spirit presses upon the heart of the unsaved the fact of God’s judgment. Everyone will stand before God in judgment. The unsaved need to know that sin was judged in the cross, and for those who trust in Christ there is deliverance from judgment upon sin and deliverance from condemnation. The unsaved must see Christ as judged and executed for them, and their judgment for sin as already past. As a token of this, Satan, as the “prince of this world,” is mentioned as already condemned. In the cross Satan met his defeat. The cross is the power of God over Satan. Satan stands already convicted, doomed, and waiting the execution of the sentence. While in the providence of God, Satan is allowed great freedom and power in this age, his end is sure, and those who reject Christ will share his destiny.

The ministry of the Holy Spirit to the unsaved follows three specific lines, then. First, the unsaved must understand that salvation depends upon faith in Christ. Second, the unsaved must understand the righteousness of God as belonging to the Person of God and as made available for the sinner through Christ. Third, the unsaved must face the fact of judgment and find in Christ One who was judged and executed as their substitute. While these elements may not be always seen clearly, they form the principles which combine to bring the unsaved into the knowledge necessary to place saving faith in Christ. Needless to say, the subjects included in the ministry of the Holy Spirit to the unsaved should constitute an important part of effective Gospel preaching.

3. The Limitations of Common Grace

From preceding discussion it is evident that common grace falls far short of efficacious grace. While the unsaved may be led to understand the Gospel sufficiently to act intelligently upon it, common grace does not have any certain effect upon the will and does not issue certainly into salvation. Two unsaved men may understand the Gospel equally, and yet one never comes to the point of saving faith while the other trusts in Christ and is saved. Common grace must be sharply distinguished from any work of God which is efficacious in bringing the unsaved to salvation.

Common grace also falls far short of the Christian’s experience of illumination. The indwelling Holy Spirit opens to the yielded Christian the storehouses of truth in the Word of God. Common grace is related almost entirely to revelation on the one subject of salvation with a view to providing an intelligent basis for faith. The revelation of common grace can never rise higher than the plane of the natural man even in the realm of salvation truth. It is closely parallel to the idea of moral and intellectual persuasion, constituting an influence, but in itself not resulting in decision.

Common grace provides none of the normal experiences of the Christian such as are produced by the unhindered indwelling Holy Spirit. The love, joy, peace, and other fruit of the Spirit are never found in those who have merely experienced common grace. While unsaved men may be able to imitate some of the outward manifestations of Christian conduct, there is never the reality of inward experience, though in some cases it may be difficult to determine whether some individuals are unsaved or saved.

While common grace is greatly limited in its character and its results, it cannot be said to be without certain phenomena. Religious instinct and fear of God are no doubt related to common grace, though they may not be connected definitely with the Scriptures. This phase of common grace is never sufficient to provide understanding of the issues of the Gospel. Common grace in its broader sense may have the effect of restraining sin, and it is often regarded as including this aspect. Outward profession of faith in Christ and conformity to moral standards without being saved may be a result of common grace. Charles Hodge writes, for instance, “Unrenewed men in the Bible are said to repent, to believe, to be partakers of the Holy Ghost, and to taste the good Word of God, and the powers of the world to come.”5 There are no doubt stages in the work of common grace from religious instinct and a fear of God which is almost universal to the experience of those who understand clearly the condition of salvation. In it all the Holy Spirit is working, striving to bring men to the knowledge of Christ. Without this preliminary ministry, the work of efficacious grace would be impossible.

The work of the Holy Spirit for the unsaved world constitutes another proof that God is a God of infinite grace and condescension, working in those who are the objects of His righteous judgment, striving to bring them to the knowledge of Christ as Savior. Without this ministry, the world would be an impossible situation for the Christian, and Gospel preaching would be fruitless. The trophies of the grace of God which some day will stand complete before God in glory will bear witness to the power of the Spirit in effectively accomplishing the task given to Him by Christ.

Dallas, Texas.