Reprobation and Boer’s Gravamen
Dr. Harry Boer submitted to the 1977 CRC Synod a gravamen in which at the outset he states: “I submit herewith for synodical examination and adjudication a gravamen against the Reformed doctrine of reprobation as taught notably in the Canons of Dort, Chapter I, Article 6 and Chapter I, Article 15 . . . “In the closing sentence of his gravamen, Dr. Boer adds: “I submit herewith for synodical examination and adjudication this gravamen . . . against what I judge to be a grievously and unbiblical, therefore unReformed, indeed unChristian doctrine.” This matter will be on the Agenda of the forthcoming 1980 CRC Synod.
Response – Over against Dr. Boer’s denial of the historic doctrine of Reprobation, a number of quotations may be adduced from various sources. Cited in this issue is an excerpt from The Doctrine of God by Herman Bavinck (Translated from the Dutch by Dr. William Hendriksen) pages 394, 395:
“Viewed in the light of the all comprehensive character of God’s counsel, it is perfectly proper to speak of a ‘double predestination.’ Sin, unbelief, death, and eternal punishment are the object of God’s government as well as are all things. Not only is it true that reducing ‘predestination’ at this point to a mere ‘foreknowledge and permission’ avails nothing, but it is also a fact that Scripture speaks very plainly and positively. It is true that the Bible does not make frequent mention of reprobation as an eternal decree. All the more, however, is reprobation represented as an act of God which becomes manifest in the history of the world. God rejects Cain, Gen. 4:5; curses Canaan, Gen. 9:25; sends Ishmael away, Gen. 21:12; Romans 9:7; Gal. 4:30; hates Esau, Gen. 25:26; Mal. 1:2 and 3; Romans 9:13; Heb. 12:17; suffered the nations to walk in their own ways, Acts 14:16. Even within the circle of special revelation mention is often made of God‘s rejection of His people and of certain definite persons, Deut. 29:28; I Sam. 15:23, 26; 16:1; II Kings 17:20; II Kings 23:27; Psalm 53:5; 78:67; 89:38; Jer. 6:30 . . . . But in that negative act of rejection a positive divine deed often reveals itself. This positive deed is described as: hatred, Mal. 1:2, 3; Romans 9:13; cursing, Gen. 9:25; hardening, Ex. 7:3; 4:21; 9:12 . . . ; obduration, I Kings 12:15; II Sam. 17:14 . . . blinding and deafening, Isa. 6:9; Math. 13:13 . . .”
Is Capital Punishment Obligatory in the Case of Murder?
A CRC synodically–appointed committee consisting of Doctors Henry Stob, Hessel Bouma III, Stephen Monsma, Clarence Vos, and Louis Vos have presented a report on Capital punishment (Acts of Synod 1979, pages 468-508) which report has been referred to the churches for study, reflection and response to the study committee by October 15, 1980 . . . The committee is to report further to the Synod of 1981. The report before the churches recommends that the CRC Synod declare:
“a. That the Scriptures lay no mandate on modern states to exercise capital punishment.
“b. That the Scriptures do permit modern states to inflict capital punishment.
“c. That according to the spirit of Scripture capital punishment is prudently exercised only under extreme conditions and not as a general rule.” (italics added).
Response – Over against this denial of the historic position of Reformed Christendom a number of quotations may be adduced from various sources. Translated from the Dutch, the following excerpts are from Dr. Abraham Kuyper’s well-known work on the Heidelberg Catechism, E Voto Dordraceno (meaning: in agreement with the wish at the Synod of Dort) Volume IV, pages 118, 119:
“Thus we do not plead for capital punishment as a deed of necessity for the disturbed citizenry, or as an example to instill fear, or as a satisfaction for the feeling of society for vengeance, but only and exclusively because God has commanded it, and that He has declared that His honor demands capital punishment for the murderer. Naturally, in this the authorities here on earth must distinguish between actual murder and the unintentional killing of someone or a killing due to personal necessity; in which the ordinance of God that the actual murderer must die is not to be weakened. This is, to be sure, more than a law of the Medes and the Persians. It is a command directly from God.’”