TTJ 19.2 (2016): 223–254 ISSN 1598-7140

Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel1

Willem A. VanGemeren Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, USA

Introduction: The Occasion for this Paper A recent publication on Christocentricity2 led me to reflect some more on John Calvin’s approach to messianic prophecies. Several faculty members of Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia), representing the classical theological areas (OT, NT, and ST), have outlined definitive hermeneutics that defines the Westminster approach to biblical interpretation, biblical theology, and systematic theology. Both the Board and Faculty are now unanimous as to the implications of Westminster’s historic mission, as President Lillback writes, “The seminary today continues to believe that the hermeneutical method identified in the Reformation tradition of Westminster is biblically sound and in fact essential for a high view of Scripture in an age of doubt, controversy, and compromise.” (6) Permit me to enter briefly into the fray of my alma mater. I matriculated at Westminster nearly fifty years ago. It was a critical time in her history, because the theologian, John Murray, had recently retired (1966) and the Old Testament scholar, Edward J. Young, had passed away (1968). Of the founding fathers, Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987) was still teaching apologetics. It was also a joy to be introduced to biblical theology by Edmund Clowney, Meredith G. Kline, and Richard Gaffin.

1. I thank the faculty and students at Chongshin Theological Seminary and Torch Trinity (Seoul, South Korea) for their engagement with different forms of this paper. I also thank Dr. Cristian G. Rata for the partial editing of the paper. 2. Peter A. Lillback, ed., Seeing Christ in all of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016). For other approaches to Christocentricity, see Dane C. Ortlund, “Christocentrism: An Asymmetrical Trinitarianism?” Themelios 34.3 (2009): 309–21. He argues that the proponents of Christocentrism of whatever form are unified in “a conviction that the Bible will be properly understood, faithfully preached, and rightly applied only if the enfleshed second person of the Trinity is seen as the integrative North Star to Christian doctrine and practice” (312). 224 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) They helped to connect the two testaments. But I do not remember a distinct Christocentric hermeneutic at Westminster during my studies. Fast forward some fifty years later, and we find a Westminster that has had to deal with several faculty members in the OT department. The Board decided that they placed an undue stress on the human authorship of Scripture and on the Ancient Near Eastern context to the virtual exclusion of the divine authorship. These faculty members held to a Christotelic approach, rather than a Christocentric hermeneutic. They connected the Old with the New Testament in the “end” (telos) but they also raised questions regarding the focus of the OT Scriptures and the organic unity of the two testaments. They assumed that on a first read Christ was hardly present, and on a second read the gospel was found in the Old Testament. The seminary Board objected to their position and drew up a set of “Affirmations and Denials,”3 by which they clarified their expectations of Westminster faculty members.4 As an alumnus, I thank the Lord for Westminster’s legacy. When I read the vision statement of J. Gresham Machen, my heart skipped a beat, because I caught a broad vision that is rooted in the truth of God’s Word and in the Westminster Standards, while perpetuating “the noble tradition of Princeton.”5 However, as I read the essays of my friends at WTS, I entered a theological arena that has been affected by internal conflicts and projects itself defensively. I have little problem with the general thrust of the essays. Vern A. Poythress (NT) views the unity of God’s revelation centered “on the divine purpose of redemption and re-creation.”6 Iain M. Duguid (OT) defines his task of interpreting the Old Testament in connection with Christ and the gospel.7 G. K. Beale (NT) defines the presuppositions that control the interpretation of the OT in the light of the use by Jesus and his apostles. The reading of the OT in full awareness of Christ’s coming throws light on the meaning of the text, but without contradiction.8 R. B. Gaffin (ST, emeritus) defines

3. Seeing Christ, 63–78. 4. By 2008 the Old Testament scholar, Peter Erick Enns, was dismissed and six years later Doug Green was forcibly retired. 5. Peter A. Lillback, ed., Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 62. 6. Vern Poythress, “Biblical Hermeneutics,” in Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 15. 7. Iain M. Duguid, “Old Testament Hermeneutics,” in Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 19. 8. G. K. Beale, “New Testament Hermeneutics,” in Seeing Christ in All of the distinction between biblical and systematic theology, He views BT as “the indispensable servant” of ST,9 when it contributes to the unified view of what the Bible teaches. The reciprocal relationship is such that BT operates within the broad understanding of ST (plot, constants), while apprehending the historical Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 225 progression of divine revelation.10 He observes, “God, then, is not merely back of the Bible and its origin in a general, loosely providential or indirect way.”11 For him interpretation aims at the search for “a single pervasive meaning.”12 Hence, biblical theology has a supportive role in keeping with the larger world of systematic theology, in the words of Gaffin, “the biblical theologian ought not to operate indifferently to the assessment of the Bible as a whole that systematic theology provides.”13 In summary, “The substance of the Bible as a whole is Christ as the consummate saving revelation of the triune God.”14 In general, I agree with Gaffin and his colleagues at Westminster.15 I still wonder whether this kind of a biblical theology can be patient with exegetical conundrums, with tensions within Scripture, and with the inherent humanness of biblical authors (1 Pet 1:10–12). Will this hermeneutic allow for potential interpretations of texts? Does it favor the divine by settling the meaning of the biblical texts on the ground that our Lord and his apostles interpret or appropriate an OT text a certain way? Is it possible that the divine-human authorship and intentionality favor the divine so as to virtually void the reality of the human authorship and intentionality? Is it a confessional mistake to read an OT text within its canonical boundaries and to revisit it in the light of the whole of Scripture? Is it possible to create a canon (NT) within the canon? Every OT text, whether cited in the NT or not, requires careful exegesis within the bounds of the book, the corpus (Law, Prophets, Writ-

Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 28–30, 32–34. 9. R. B. Gaffin, “Systematic Theology and Hermenutics,” in Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 49. 10. Gaffin, “Systematic,” 50. 11. Gaffin, “Systematic,” 41. 12. Gaffin, “Systematic,” 41. 13. Gaffin, “Systematic,” 50. 14. Gaffin, “Systematic,” 48. 15. President Lillback and the Board have gone on record that the Westminster hermeneutics is entailed by the Westminster Standards. The discussions of the Board and Westminster Faculty brought about an extensive set of affirmations and denials. ings), and the whole canon of Scripture.16 William B. Evans, a Westminster alumnus teaching at Erskine Seminary, wonders, “The insistence that the OT writers must have had NT Christological meanings in mind when they wrote smacks of bibliological Eutychianism, i.e., an overemphasis on the divine to the virtual exclusion of the human.” He concludes, “By staking their case on a curious and speculative argument about what must have been in the minds of the biblical writers, they have not only placed themselves at odds with a significant portion of the Reformed tradition, but they have also painted themselves into a corner from which there is no easy exit.”17 226 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) I am concerned that the “hermeneutic” stance not be a reason for WTS to dissociate herself from the larger body of Reformed seminaries. J. Gresham Machen clearly set forth the theological distinctiveness of Westminster’s mission. He states that her mission is broadly Reformed and in continuity with the heritage of Augustine, Calvin, the Westminster Standards, and the Princeton tradition. He says, “Glorious is the heritage of the Reformed faith. God grant that it may go forth to new triumphs even in the present setting of unbelief!”18 Machen’s vision of Reformed theology is broad, ecumenical, and historic. Machen is also ecumenical when he invites others to join in the venture, saying that the Westminster community rejoices in “the approximations to that body of truth which other systems of theology contain; we rejoice in our Christian fellowship with other evangelical churches.”19 I understand the Board’s desire to perpetuate a heritage that has come about because of certain faculty members who have shaped the narrative of WTS. Over time the Machen vision has become more refined and insistent on particular approaches to theology and biblical studies. I am grateful for this heritage and support the Board’s intent to maintain the cumulative heritage. “But we also value the insights that have grown up at Westminster over the decades.”20 However, this heritage is selective, as

16. See Vern Poythress, “Divine Meaning of Scripture,” WTJ 48 (1986): 241–79, especially p. 267. 17. “How Much Did the OT Writers Know? (2): The Spectre of Bibliological Eutychianism.” See https://theecclesialcalvinist.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/ how-much- did-the-ot-writers-know-2-the-spectre-of-bibliological-eutychianism/ 18. J. Gresham Machen, “Westminster Theological Seminary: Its Purpose and Plan,” in Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016), 58. 19. Machen, “Westminster,” 58. 20. Board of Trustees, “Appendix B: Affirmations and Denials Regarding Recent Issues,” in Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, ed. Peter A. Lillback (Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary many faculty members have had little impact on this vision or have been encouraged to leave. Moreover, I have a problem with the assumption that biblical theology must be subservient to systematic theology in that systematic theology presents an “overall unity that systematic theology is concerned to provide for the life of the church and its mission in the world.”21 The real issue is theological, rather than systematic theological. Fred Sanders argues persuasively that the doctrine of the Trinity distinguishes the Christian faith, because it is “the Foundation of Foundations.” He claims that “(t)he Trinity is a biblical doctrine, then, not just because its elements are stated in the books of the Christian Scriptures, but also because the two-Testament canon came into existence to bear witness that the God of Israel sent his Son and poured out his Holy Spirit. … In short, the Trinity is not so much in Scripture as Scripture is in the Trinity.”22 Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 227 The biblical theologian lives with a tension. He may see the connection between diverse topics from the elevation of systematic theology and may also get lost in the biblical text. We find this tension in Calvin as well. Sometimes Calvin rejects traditional “messianic” interpretations. At other times, he conforms to tradition or is caught somewhere in the middle. For example, his interpretation of the Song of Songs combines literal interpretation with allegorical reading of the relation of Christ and the Church. In this paper, I intend to look at Calvin’s pastoral hermeneutics of appropriation.23 It is a form of Christocentricity that includes five interpretive stages: (1) a diligent search to understand the meaning of God’s Word, including the divine intent as perceived by the analogy of faith, (2) an encounter with God’s revelation in Jesus Christ through the Word, (3) an apprehension of the linguistic/thematic/theological patterns (typology) that connect the text with other texts, (4) a wisdom insight as to the applicability of God’s Word in a new historical situation, and (5) an encouragement to be obedient to the voice of Christ.

Press, 2016), 76. 21. Board of Trustees, “Appendix B,” 77. 22. Fred Sanders, The Triune God (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016), 90. Regrettably, this book was published after my lecture was presented. I believe that WTS aims at this truth, but may have created a false dichotomy between systematic and biblical theology. See also Kevin J. Vanhoozer, First Theology: God, Scripture, & Hermeneutics (Downers Grove: InterVassity Press, 2002). 23. Appropriation is more than interpretation. I thank my friend at the Theological university (Kampen, NL), Dr. Jos Colijn, for the term. He may not use it as I do, but appropriation is mora than application. It involves several layers of interpretation. My study focuses on Calvin’s exposition of Daniel, but is not restricted by it.

General Principles employed in the Exposition of God’s Word: Search for the Meaning of God’s Word Calvin mines the biblical text for what it says. He presents his readers with what is “solid,” avoiding flights of fancy.24 His contemporaries accused him of being a Judaizer, because he used the literal method of interpretation with consistency.25 At times he agrees with Jewish interpreters against a Christian over- reading of the text (see his comments on Isa 61:1) and rejects Christian spiritualizing interpretations.26 At other times, he disagrees with both Jewish and Christian interpreters (Jer 30:4–6).27 He walks a tightrope in order to understand what is exegetically solid and to reject “childish interpretations” and “foolish speculations.”28 Take for example his comment on “Lucifer” in Isaiah 14:12:

But when passages of Scripture are taken up at random, and no attention is paid to the context, we need not wonder that mistakes of this kind frequently arise. Yet it was an instance of very gross ignorance, to imagine that Lucifer was the king of devils, and that the Prophet gave him this 228 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) 24. John L Thompson observes that Calvin “strains to find a direct tie to the literal or historical sense” (“Calvin as Biblical Interpreter,” in The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin, ed. Donald K. McKim [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004], 68). 25. David L. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis of the Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster/Knox, 1995), 7–12. See the charge of Judaizing interpretations brought against Calvin by the Lutheran theologian, Aegidius Hunnius (1550– 1603), in Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 4–7, 52–72. Puckett concludes, “Such cautions in the use of the Old Testament texts is characteristic of Calvin’s approach. His view that language and context are weighty matters in exegesis and his reluctance to depart from historical interpretation – even for good theological reasons – lead Hunnius to view him as a Judaizer” (56). 26. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 53–56. Puckett comments that “(i)t is far more common to find Calvin criticizing Christian than Jewish exegetes for failing to interpret the Old Testament contextually” (65). 27. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 64–5, 82–8. 28. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 67. name. But as these inventions have no probability whatever, let us pass by them as useless fables.29

Muller agrees with the consensus of scholars that Calvin’s exegetical method is not that different from the best medieval interpreters, except for his commitment to brevity and clarity. However, Calvin’s “hermeneutic of promise and fulfillment” of OT prophecies is distinctive.30 In his commentary on the prophets Calvin consistently listens to the historical context of the prophecy and as elsewhere pastorally applies the ancient text to the context of his audience by the principle of analogy or what Kraus designates as “kerygmatic analogy.”31 The analogy of faith (Scripture interprets Scripture) allows him to listen to the whole witness of Scripture. The analogy holds between the various contexts of divine revelation and application: the prophetic context, Jesus and his ministry, and God’s people throughout the ages. The promises find their fulfillment through time; their fulfillment is progressive, 32 rather than what Muller calls “a hermeneutic of multiple fulfillment.”33 Fulfillment is God’s providential outworking of his purposes in Jesus Christ. Fulfillment takes place in history and throughout history. It has its goal and focus on Jesus Christ, who was actively working out the Father’s purposes in creation and in redemption as recorded in the OT. He fulfilled the promises to the Fathers, but also raised greater expectations of fulfillment. He entered history at the time of the incarnation, helped his contemporaries to see the glory of the Lord, but was rejected by people. The resurrection signifies that the last days are here, and that the final stage of the harvest has begun. The Holy Spirit joins together with the glorified Christ in working out God’s purposes for the Church and for creation, so that all may be subject to God. Fulfillment has taken place, is taking place, and will take place (Heb 13:8). God’s promises are confirmed in Jesus Christ (2 Cor 1:20) both in the OT and NT. Both the OT and the NT look to Christ and both are eschatological in nature,

29. Calvin’s comment on Isaiah 14:12. Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 229 30. Richard A. Muller, “The Hermeneutic of Promise and Fulfillment in Calvin’s Exegesis of the Old Testament Promises of the Kingdom,” in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. David C. Steinmetz (Durham: Duke University Press, 1990). 68–70. 31. H. J. Kraus, “Calvin’s Exegetical Principles,” Interp 31 (1977), 8–18. 32. I have argued in favor of progressive fulfillment in my paper presented to the doctoral seminar at Chongshin on November 2, 2015, “Calvin’s Eschatological Typology,” in Interpreting the Prophetic Word, in my earlier essays on Calvin and the Jews in “Israel as the Hermeneutical Crux in the Interpretation of Prophecy, Part I,” WTJ 45 (1983): 32145; “Part II,” WTJ 46 (1984): 25497. 33. Muller, “Hermeneutic of Promise,” 77. because the believers before and after Christ have been looking for the grand finale: the end of evil, the vindication of the saints, and the full manifestation of the glory of God. Calvin sets the text in its appropriate historical context, but also views the progressive working out of God’s word through time: the postexilic world, the ministry of the Lord Jesus, and the kingdom of God till the final consummation “from its beginning to its end.”34 Calvin’s hermeneutic allows for extension of meaning or typological interpretation.35 He practices a form of typology by extending the meaning of the promise. The double intentionality (human and divine) of the text ensures that texts are related to each other by God’s overarching plan. The redemptive-historical framework permits him to extend the meaning of the text by the principle of anagogy (perspective of eternity, lit. ascent [to heaven]), by analogy, by figuration, and by pastoral application.36 In his writing he strives at understanding the mind of the author and of God through the Spirit, “Calvin’s choice of words seems to suggest that the intention of the prophet and that of the Holy Spirit are so closely related as to be virtually interchangeable.”37 Calvin did not resolve the tension between the divine and human, because it was not there.38

34. Calvin on Joel 2:30–31, cited in Muller, “The Hermeneutic of Promise and Fulfillment,” 3. Muller comments, “Calvin will note move from the grammatical and historical sensus to an allegorical sensus, but he will develop the complexus of ideas presented in a text to cover an extended meaning virtually identical in content to that covered by allegory or trope but more closely governed by the grammatical and historical sensus of the text” (73). 35. Muller comments, “Always avoiding the language of allegory, Calvin sometimes speaks of the extended meaning of a text beyond its original context as a synecdoche, a figure of speech …, a technical term borrowed from rhetoric – indicating inclusive or extended implication and usually the signification of a larger whole by the naming of a part” (“Hermeneutic of Promise,” 75). 36. Thompson, “Calvin as Biblical Interpreter,” 70–1. 37. Brevard S. Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 212. 230 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) 38. Childs politely disagrees with Pucket (Struggle, 210, 212, 309). Puckett had argued in favor of a tension (John Calvin’s Exegesis, 32–7), 140. He writes “Calvin’s belief in the dual authorship of Scripture and his views of the unity and diversity of Scripture deeply impact his approach to exegesis. Belief in the human authorship of scripture is foundational to the historical interpretation – the Bible must be interpreted as a product of human writers speaking to an audience of contemporaries” (John Calvin’s Exegesis, 45). Encounter with God in Jesus Christ in the whole of Scripture: “Seeing Christ in all of Scripture”39 (tota Scriptura) Calvin was a pastor at heart. He led his audience into the sacred privilege of hearing God’s Word afresh through the appropriation of God’s Word in the context of the Church, He was conversant with interpretive problems of his time, but also aware of the issues of his time. Though not trained as an exegete or theologian, Calvin was strongly motivated to know his Triune God through his revelation in Scripture, and that meant for him all of God’s revelation in its breadth and depth. He humbly entered the text to meet God afresh and to better apprehend the divine counsel, to grow in obedience, and above all to know his Savior. All these aspects of his ministry were in the service of his being a minister of Jesus Christ, a preacher of the Gospel. Just because the needs of his congregants were so great, Calvin did not give himself to speculation or to novelty. Instead, he appropriated God’s Word by exposition and by being obedient to it.

The Revelation of God in Jesus Christ Calvin evidently listened to the various dimensions of the text. He paid attention to the language, literary forms, metaphors, the individual characters, the narrative plot, and poetic and lyric expressions. At the center of God’s Word is the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Through his expositions and prayers Calvin exemplified and instructed God’s people to dwell in the Word and to be indwelt by it. He would open each lesson with this prayer, “May the Lord grant that we may engage in contemplating the mysteries of His heavenly wisdom with really increasing devotion and to our edification.” (Benge, 7) Calvin proposed that we enter God’s Word, understand it, receive it, and apply it appropriately, “We ought also to admit Scripture to be given to us to enable us to find there whatever would otherwise be hidden from us. For God opens, as it were, his own heart to us.” 40 (9:22; ad loc.) At issue is not knowledge of the Word, but an encounter with divine revelation that brings about a life of obedience. Thus, Calvin helped God’s people to appropriate God’s Word in his biblical expositions and in his dwelling in God’s Word.

39. The heading is taken from: Seeing Christ in all of Scripture, edited by Peter A. Lillback. 40. Calvin, too, needed the assurance of God’s promise and comfort. By the inclusive use of the first person plural, he saw himself as a part of the congregation. “… unless we are already embraced by his regards, do we find God propitious, (than) when we flee by faith to his loving-kindness. Then in reliance upon Christ as our Mediator and Advocate, we dare to approach him as sons to a parent” (Dan 9:23, ad loc). Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 231 Appropriation takes place when we dwell in God’s Word to be indwelt with the Spirit. Leslie Newbegin challenges us to participate in a “continuous conversation” with Jesus Christ through his Word, and thus to participate in the new community, “The person who allows the biblical story to be the all- surrounding ambience of daily life and who continually seeks to place all experiences in this context finds that daily life is a continuous conversation with the one whose character is revealed in the biblical story as a whole.”41 Calvin strongly argued for the substantial similarity of the Law and the Gospel, because under both administrations, God invites his fallen creatures to benefit from the covenant of grace, holds out the hope of a blessed future in his Son, confirms the benefits of the covenant with signs, assures mortals of fellowship with him in this life and forever, and seals these benefits in his Son, Jesus Christ, by his Spirit (II. x).42 Thus, Calvin further clarified the ancient Rule of Faith, also known as the analogy of faith (analogia fidei), according to which the message of Moses and the Prophets reveals strong connections with the message of Jesus and his Apostles. Calvin maintained the unity and totality of Scripture as the Word of God. In Book I of the Institutes Calvin spoke of the necessity to know the One True Father-Creator God through Creation and through the Word. But the knowledge of God and of self is veiled and corrupted by the Fall. To this end God revealed himself in the Redeemer who spoke to Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles (Inst. II. x–ix). Both testaments reveal the One God, the author of grace and salvation in Jesus Christ.43 He shapes One community through the Word, as the missiologist, Leslie Newbigin (1909–1998), observes so poignantly, “At the center of the life of each community was the continual reading of the Bible, both in

41. Leslie Newbigin, Proper Confidence: Faith, Doubt, and Certainty in Christian Discipleship (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 88. 42. Calvin developed the differences also under five headings (II: xi). Though the covenant of grace is one in substance, the covenant given to Israel under the Law provided temporal support, assured Israel through images and ceremonies, encouraged the godly in Israel to seek the true reality behind the symbols and ceremonies and a freedom apart from the law, so that ultimately all peoples of the earth may share in their witness to the Creator and Redeemer-God in Jesus Christ, the true Son of God. 43. Dustin W. Benge (Lifting Up Our Hearts, 6) cites Bruce Gordon (Calvin [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009], 293) as writing, “(i)n his theological and pastoral work Calvin’s example was Paul, but when he entered the pulpit it was the prophets of the Old Testament who loomed large.” See also Herman J. Selderhuis, John Calvin: A Pilgrim’s Life (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2009), 66. study and in the worship of the community. The biblical story came to be the one story that shaped the understanding of who we are, where we come from, and where we are going, it was the story that was their mental framework, the story that defined human life and its meaning and destiny.”44 232 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) Central to the shaping of God’s story is Christ, the Son. The preIncarnate and the eternally pre-existent Creator-Logos (John 1:1–5) spoke the world into being. He revealed his glorious word to Moses and the Prophets.45 The authors of the Old Testament had seen the glory of the Son (John 12:39–41).46 At the center of the Gospel story is the gradual revelation of the God-Man, the incarnate Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity, as Newbigin puts it “We cannot understand Jesus except in the context of the Bible as a whole. To detach Jesus from this story is to create a mythical figure. In his teaching and in his action he speaks and acts as the one who brings the story of God’s dealing with Israel to its point of crisis and decision.”47 Calvin’s theory of knowledge (epistemology) is holistic as he invites all people to know the Creator-Redeemer God, the self, and the world of creation.48 The study of theology was no longer restricted to the clergy; it was incumbent on every Christian to walk with God on a journey (pilgrimage) and to discover the glory of the Lord in Creation and in Scripture. The Institutes were to provide a framework within which such discovery could take place.49 At the center of the Institutes is the revelation of the Father in Jesus Christ. He is the center. Christocentricity is

44. Leslie Newbigin, Proper Confidence, 13. 45. T. H. L. Parker, Calvin’s Old Testament Commentaries (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, Press, 1986), 187. The Holy Spirit inspired the authors of Scripture so as to conform their writing to God’s full intent, and the individual authors maintained their unique style and identity, including their occasional frustration with God and their questions of God. (Parker, Commentaries, 189–93) 46. Calvin makes a distinction between image and full light. The Old Testament saints saw God’s glory as a shadow, but in Christ’s Advent the “full splendor” is revealed. (Inst., II. Ix. 1). 47. Newbigin, Proper Confidence, 88. 48. On April 15, 2016, I lectured at the Sadang Campus of Chongshin on the topic “The Reformed Worldview and Scholarship: Wisdom Epistemology.” I thank God for Abraham Kuyper’s concern for integration that Prof. Cornelius Van Til faithfully taught me. 49. In the French edition of the Institutes (1559), he reminds the French readers that the systematic approach of the Institutes will advance theological students in reading God’s Word more coherently, “Moreover, it has been my purpose in this labor to prepare and instruct candidates in sacred theology for the reading of the divine Word, in order that they may be able both to have easy access to it and to advance in it without stumbling” (Institutes, McNeil, ed., 1960). holistic. The question is not how something connects with Jesus, but, instead, how we see God, self, and the world from the perspective of God’s revelation in Jesus Christ.

Calvin’s Heart for Jesus Christ As Calvin felt himself alienated from the comforts of the Roman Catholic Church and embraced the spirit of humanism, he opened the door for countless Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 233 people who had become pilgrims and refugees. They were in search of Jesus Christ apart from ecclesiastical superstitions. T. H. L. Parker compares the early stage of the Reformation to “a bewildered Western Christendom, … taking its first steps outside the church in the apparent freedom of secularity.”50 John Calvin (JC) understood that the only way to serve Christ is to have a heart aflame for the GOSPEL. Calvin’s seal beautifully illustrates how JC, John Calvin, presents a heart aflame for Jesus Christ (JC).51

Calvin’s Prayer for Rest in Christ52 Calvin’s lectures on Daniel were given during what Selderhuis calls the “soldier” stage53 (1559–1564), when Calvin was tired of the struggle and prayed for “certain rest and a tranquil inheritance,” “that happy rest,” and “our victory, in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Calvin had found in Daniel the model a courageous “soldier” with an “impregnable” faith that encourages God’s people to await the victory. Calvin prayed that God’s people may learn to be “Danielic” soldiers in their trials growing in resilience while waiting for the Lord’s rest.54

50. T. H. L. Parker, John Calvin: A Biography (Louisville: WJK, 2007), 164. 51. See Selderhuis, Calvin, 29. 52. In addition to the prayers before and after the lectures, Calvin wrote the largest chapter on prayer in the Institutes is on prayer (III. xx). 53. Selderhuis, Calvin, 236–59. 54. Calvin prayed, “… Thus may we stand firm and unconquered against all the attacks of Satan, and the world, and the impious, and so may our faith Calvin encouraged his audience to persevere in their trials by rejecting any earthly comfort and continue their struggle looking for victory, and a blessed rest. He treats Daniel’s lengthy exilic experience as typological of the attacks on the Church in the era of the Reformation. Calvin prayed that the Lord would sustain his weary children and grant them the promised freedom, lest they lose all hope.1

1 . “Grant, Almighty God, since thou settest before us so remarkable an example in thy holy Prophet, whom thou didst adorn in so many ways that he wrestled to even extreme old age with various and almost innumerable trials, and yet was never mentally broken down: Grant us to be endowed with the same untiring fortitude. May we proceed in the course of our holy calling without the slightest despondency through whatever may happen. When we see thy Church upon the brink of ruin, and its 234 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) The mirror-image of Daniel is held out before God’s people, encouraging them to “dwell mentally in heaven” till they “arrive at that celestial rest.”1 remain impregnable, until at length we enjoy the fruit of its victory in thy heavenly kingdom, through Christ our Lord. -- Amen. (Prayer after Lecture 38) … May we ever proceed in the course of thy holy calling, till at length we are released from all contests, and arrive at that blessed rest which is laid up for us in heaven, by the same our Lord Jesus Christ. -- Amen. (Prayer after Lecture 50) … May we strive with unbroken courage, until at length we shall be discharged from our warfare, and gathered into that blessed rest which we know to be laid up for us in heaven, through Christ our Lord. – Amen (Prayer after Lecture 52) … The trials may last, but will end at his appointed time, “Thus may we constantly make war with all kinds of trials, and persist unconquered until thou shalt stretch forth thine hand from heaven to us, and raise us to that blessed rest which is there laid up for us by Christ our Lord. -- Amen. (Prayer after Lecture 54) … Grant, Almighty God, since it pleases thee to exercise our confidence by not allowing us any fixed or stable rest upon earth, that we may learn to rest in thee while the world rolls over and over even a hundred times. … May we have full confidence in thee, and never cease to march under thy standard with constant and invincible courage, until at length thou shalt gather us into that happy rest which is laid up for us in heaven, by Christ our Lord. -- Amen.” (Prayer after Lecture 58) Though Calvin opens a moralistic typology in his prayers, he does not end up a moralist. The examples from the past together with our hope in Jesus Christ, transport the people of God to focus on the reality in Jesus Christ. To this end he prays,

Grant, Almighty God, as through our extreme blindness, we cannot gaze upon open daylight, that we may be enlightened by thy Spirit. May we profit by all thy prophecies by which thou wishest to direct us to thine only-begotten Son; embrace him with true and certain faith, and remain obedient to him as our ruler and guide; and after we have passed through this world, may we at length arrive at that heavenly rest which has been obtained for us by the blood of the same thy Son. -- Amen. (Prayer after Lecture 49)

Search for Patterns (Typology): Messianic Expectations57 In Calvin’s writings, the hope of God’s people and the fulfillment of the divine promises focus on the Christ (Parker, Commentaries, 194– 205). Christ as

enemies plotting desperately for its destruction, may we constantly look for that liberty which thou hast promised.” (After Lecture 52) NOTE: All emphases (bold or italics) in quotations from Calvin are mine to bring out quickly the point being made for the convenience of readers of the Korean translation. 1 . “Grant, Almighty God, as thou didst formerly appear to Daniel thy holy servant, and to the other prophets, and by their doctrine didst render thy glory conspicuous to us at this day, that we may reverently approach and behold it. When we have become entirely devoted to thee, may those mysteries which it has pleased thee to offer by means of their hand and labors, receive from us their due estimation. May we be cast down in ourselves and be raised by hope and faith towards heaven; when prostrate before thy face, may we so conduct ourselves in the world, as in the interval to become free from all the de- Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 235 the Head cannot be separated from his Body. He suffered on behalf of his Body of believers in all their experiences, frustrations, and expectations. He sustained them in their anguish as well as in their hope. After all, they have become partners of his kingdom, “We must hold, therefore, that whenever Scripture affirms Christ’s reign to be eternal, this is to be extended to the whole Body of the Church and should not only be applied to his person.” (comment on 2:44). Calvin was evidently not Christomonic in that he did not dwell on the salvific benefits of salvation: heaven, forgiveness. 58 His eyes looked at the wide expanse

praved desires and passions of our flesh, and dwell mentally in heaven. Then at length may we be withdrawn from this earthly warfare, and arrive at that celestial rest which thou hast prepared for us, through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. -- Amen.” (Prayer after Lecture 53) 57. See my article “Our Missional God: Redemptive Historical Preaching and the Missio Dei,” in Living Waters from Ancient Springs: Essays in Honor of Cornelis Van Dam, ed. Jason Van Vliet (Eugene Oregon: Pickwick, 2011,) 198–217. I argue for patience in prophetic interpretation in favor messianic expectations over against expectations of the Messiah. At issue is not the identity, but rather the work to be accomplished. In the end, everything is contingent on the mission of the Lord Jesus Christ. In that sense, my interpretation is both Christocentric and Christotelic. 58. For the distinction, read Matthew Holst, “Christocentric or Christomonic? We should be careful in preaching Christ from the Scriptures to the exclusion of the Father and the Spirit,” The Aquila Report, Monday, November 3, 2014. http://theaquilareport.com/christocentric-or-christomonic/. The term christomorphic applies to those interpretations where the “form” of the pre- of the Gospel and the full range of Scripture. He opposed any form of “twisting” the text and favors what is solid. He warns his readers against a narrow reading of Psalm 72, “Those who would interpret it simply as a foretelling of the kingdom of Christ, seem to twist the words violently.” Calvin ruled out many traditional interpretations of “expectations of the Messiah” (see Isa 61:1). He was more open to “messianic expectations” that are shaped by God’s promises of redemption and gave rise to a deep longing for resolution in God’s eternal and victorious Kingdom.59 These expectations were expressions of hope, faith, and love in a world of full of oppression, persecution, and suffering (Rom 5:3–5). The promises encourage the godly to be open to the manner and time of fulfillment as they await the culmination of Jesus’ mission of the complete transformation of all things, resulting in a world of righteousness, justice, peace, and joy (Rom 14:17–19). Though there have been many agents who filled the mission – priests, prophets, kings, including foreign kings (Cyrus), all of them were marked by incompleteness. The drama of redemption anticipates culmination, and the history of revelation looks for the ultimate unveiling. All these expressions of hope are “messianic” expectations. It is the Christ who says, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End” (Rev 21:6; cf. Rev 1:18; 3:7). He is the one sent by the Father, approved by him, and duly authorized to bring in God’s Kingdom in its fullness. Before the unveiling of the Christ, God’s people looked for ultimacy and fulfillment, but had to rest in agents representing the Christ: descendants of 236 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) David (Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah, Jehoiachin, Zerubbabel), Aaronic priests, prophets (Elijah), and foreign kings (Cyrus). The godly had messianic expectations as they awaited divine salvation, righteousness, and peace (1 Pet 1:10–12), such as Simeon who was “waiting for the consolation of Israel” (Luke 2:25). In the revelation of “the Messiah,” we may speak of “expectations of the Messiah.” Every messianic expectation gives rise to

incarnate Christ conceals the identity of the Christ and reveals his presence and activity as the Second Person of the Trinity. It is used to identify the recent WTS position, see William B. Evans, “Has Westminster Seminary Changed? More Reflections on WTS’s Actions Regarding OT Professor Doug Green’s Understanding of the New Testament’s Use of the Old,” http://theaquilareport.com/ has-westminster-seminary-changed/. 59. Wolter H. Rose, Zemah and Zerubbabel: Messianic Expectations in the Early Postexilic Period, JSOTSS 304 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press: 2000); “Messianic Expectations in the Old Testament,” Die Skriftig 35.2 (2001): 275–88. See the fine discussion on the kingdom pattern in the recent publication of my doctoral student Ron Haydon, “’Seventy Sevens are Decreed”: A Canonical Approach to Daniel 9:24–27, Journal of Theological Interpretation Supplement 15 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2016), 186–121. hope. There had been many speculations on the identity of the messiah (“anointed one”), but it awaited the further revelation of God in Christ to permit people to finally come to know the identity of the Messiah of God (Matt 16:16).60 We encounter “messianic expectations” in the entire story of redemption from beginning to the end. Calvin is very cautious in identifying the specifics of the Messiah’s Advent, as Parker’s observes, “But a Christological interpretation of the promises occurs less often than a straightforward exposition of the circumstance of the promise.”61 The biblical authors of the Old Testament witness to the potentiality of redemption by addressing people with the Good News of divine salvation, transcendence, perfection, fullness, rest and peace (Sabbath), ultimate victory, and above all the revelation of the glory and presence of God (1 Pet 1:10–12). God’s servants witnessed to the richness and manifoldness of redemption employing metaphors, symbols, and imagery from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. Genesis 1 opens with the “indissoluble” triadic vision of God’s Creation, Kingship, and Temple,62 and Revelation 21-22 confirm the perfection of Creation, the wisdom of God’s Kingship, and the transformation of the Temple by the presence of the Triune God. These three subjects shape the biblical narrative: (1) the goodness of creation and the fallenness of humanity; (2) the persistence of evil and the excellence of God’s kingship; and (3) the anguish of human existence and the longing for God’s presence (Temple) from).63 Everything coheres in the Christ. Hence, it is regrettable that the “redemptive-historical” approach all too often entails an event-centered (creation, fall, redemption) or a prediction-fulfillment approach in the exposition of the Old Testament. For Calvin the expectations entailed in the Old Testament are so much greater than the salvation accomplished by Jesus Christ. Every book contributes to the confluence of streams and rivulets Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 237 that increasingly clarify the messianic hope. Further, the three persons of the Trinity are

60. See my article “Our Missional God,” 198–217. 61. Parker, Commentaries, 194. 62. Jon D. Levenson, Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible (Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1985), 109. 63. Willem A. VanGemeren, The Progress of Redemption: The Story of Salvation from Creation to the New Jerusalem (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988; Baker, 1995); “A Well-Founded Hope: Old Testament Perspectives On Hope And Anguish,” Lecture at the annual meeting of the Fellows of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity on February 5, 2016 see https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=l77XajRTCuA&list=PLPF5Cj-f6CUNnetHTYHhYerQSVP1sqZYb. fully engaged in the drama of redemption64 as they participate in and reveal a world of reconciliation, transcendence, permanence, perfection, truth, and shalom. Calvin saw the prophetic imagery of perfection, newness, and abundance as having a reality or substance in the Christ, arguing that only Christ can bring in such a beautiful world.65 The history of revelation opens up the divine reality in Jesus Christ. He is the Son of God, the Creator, the Giver of the Law and the Prophets, the Redeemer, the Logos, the Holy One of Israel, the Great Prophet, Priest, and King. He holds together Creation, Kingship, and Temple. On Daniel 7:14 Calvin cautioned against the identification of the time and manner of fulfillment. The biblical language may suggest fulfillment as realized, but Calvin cautioned his readers to look for even more, “Meanwhile we must add, that the events which the Prophet here narrates are not yet complete; but this ought to be familiar to all the pious, for whenever the kingdom of Christ is treated of, his glory magnificently extolled, as if it were now absolutely complete in all its parts.”66 Fulfillment is a movie rather than a still picture. In his exposition of the Seventy Weeks, Calvin paints with broad strokes. He is cognizant of the interpretive conundrums.67 He does read

64. See Selderhuis, 59–60 (CO 9.893). 65. Parker, Commentaries, 195. 66. Comment on 7:14; ad loc. Calvin’s remarks on Jeremiah 31:24 are appropriate, “Now, were any one to ask, when was this fulfilled? We must bear in mind what has been said elsewhere, — that the Prophets, when speaking of the restoration of the Church, included the whole kingdom of Christ from the beginning to the end. And in this our divines go astray, so that by confining these promises to some particular time, they are compelled to fly to allegories; and thus they wrest, and even pervert all the prophecies. But the Prophets, as it has been said, include the whole progress of Christ’s kingdom when they speak of the future redemption of the people. The people began to do well when they returned to their own country; but soon after distresses came as Daniel had predicted. It was, therefore, necessary for them to look for the coming of Christ. We now taste of these benefits of God as long as we are in the world. We hence see that these prophecies are not accomplished in one day, or in one year, no, not even in one age, but ought to be understood as referring to the 238 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) beginning and the end of Christ’s kingdom.” (Comment on Jer 31:24; emphases mine) See my paper presented to the doctoral seminar at Chongshin on November 2, 2015, “Calvin’s Eschatological Typology.” 67. Richard P. Belcher, Jr. helpfully schematizes the issues raised by the Daniel text in “The Seventy Weeks in Daniel 9,” A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the Old Testament: The Gospel Promised. Ed. Miles V. Van Pelt (Wheaton: Crossway, 2016), 543–46. What follows is my summary of the issues: a The beginning of the “Seventy Weeks”: 597, 586, 583, 539, 537, 458, 445 BC. b The concluding date or event: (1) a past event (Antiochus IV, 164 BC; the text messianically, but is less concerned with the details of the chronology, as he is with the finality of Christ’s victory and kingdom and the contrast between the covenants. Calvin contrasts the promised reconciliation to be “far better, more excellent, and more desirable” and the “everlasting righteousness” to be more excellent, “something promised far better and more excellent than anything which had been granted under the law, ... (9:24; ad loc.). It is small wonder that Calvin lamented the many different interpretations accessible at his time. As a preacher, he waded into deep waters so as to help God’s people to envision aspects of what God is doing in shaping human history in Jesus Christ. Calvin is like a shepherd who guides his flock to swim across a river to the other side. But he is also cautious.68 He also (too) readily dismisses alternate views.69

the ministry of Christ and his death, AD 32, the introduction of Paul at his participation in Stephen’s stoning, AD 33, (2) an indefinite time at the end, (3) a future event (after the rapture, before the millennium, before the coming of the Antichrist). c The configuration of the Seventy Weeks is taken to be (1) an exact or approximate number of years, ca. 490 (=7*70) years or (2) a symbolic number. d The identity of the “messiah.” Interpreters vary greatly whether this person is beneficent or malevolent, a messianic or a non-messianic character, and whether the twofold use of the “anointed one” speaks of the same (Antiochus IV, 164 BC; Jesus Christ), or two different people: Christ and the Antichrist. See also Ron Haydon, “Seventy Sevens are Decreed.” 68. Calvin cautioned his readers regarding the interpretive issues: “we may hope to understand this prophecy, provided only we are attentive and teachable (9:24) … meanwhile, I shall speak cautiously, because I am very desirous of being silent upon all points except whose which are useful and necessary to be known. (9:25) … we must use conjecture, because we have no certain explanation to bring forward which we can point out as the only sufficient one (9:25) … With respect to the present passage, I confess myself unable to deny the existence of much controversy. (9:25) … While we allow much diversity and contradictions united with great obscurity, still we must always return to the same point (9:25) … The passage is obscure, and may be rendered in a variety of ways, and consequently interpreters differ much from each other. … But as these two passages refer to the same abomination, I will not insist on this point” (9:26). 69. He writes, “What necessity, then, is there for treating a certainty as doubtful? And why litigate the point when God pronounces the commencement of this period to be at the termination of the seventy years proclaimed by Jeremiah? (9:25) … We must now Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 239 turn to the sixty-two weeks; and if I cannot satisfy every one, I shall still content myself with great simplicity, and I trust that all sound and humble disciples of Christ will easily acquiesce in this exposition. While Calvin struggled with the complexity of the text, he readily spoke of the encouraging vision God had given to Daniel, “He (Daniel) died in exile, and never beheld the performance of the Prophet’s prophecies concerning the happy state of the Church, as if immediately preparing to celebrate its triumphs” (9:23). Calvin thus connects Daniel, Christ, and the Church from the perspective of the history of divine revelation. The God who spoke to Daniel is none other than Jesus Christ, whose Word is true at all times. Calvin comments, “… but let us fly to the remedy which Daniel used, not to seek the understanding of God’s word from angels, who do not appear to us, but from Christ himself, …” (Comment on 7:16). Evidently, Calvin’s strength lies in the meta-narrative, i.e., the connections of the text with the larger narrative of Scripture. He read the text from the vantage point of discovery. He has discovered the reality in Christ and looks on the Old Testament text as a shadowy reality. This is his forte, but also his weakness. On the one hand, he avoids speculation and novelty. Instead, he is suggestive of a linkage between the temporal and the eternal structures of reality. The temporal (structures, people) are shadows of expectations of permanence and excellence. They point to a surplus, a greater reality. They are not predictions of details of the Messiah; they are images that form a total picture between one type of reality and the expectation of a greater reality. These are prophetic, but without suggesting predictive details. Calvin struggled with messianic interpretations of the text. He did not make our task any easier. There is always the danger in being dismissive of Christocentric interpretations as well as being open to them, especially when confessional or traditional interpretations claim to understand the divine intent without a consideration of the range of interpretation.70 God’s purposes may be clearly in sight, but God’s ways

(9:25) … we have stated how inadmissible is any interpretation but the first decree of Cyrus, which permitted the people freely to return to their country. (9:25) … This short clause may be taken in various senses, yet I do not hesitate to represent the angel’s meaning to be this -- … The genuine sense, I have no doubt, is as follows, -- … “ (9:26). 70. For example, the works of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669), Professor of Old Testament at the University of Franeker, were written from a Christocentric perspective that was unaware of the larger world of the Old Testament and was mired by apocalyptic and allegorical speculations. Cocceius interpreted the OT in the light of the NT, because “the key to understanding the Old lies in the New” (237). He looks for patterns to explain history (241), but allows for prophetic interpretation apocalyptically. Like Calvin he applies the patterns existentially to God’s people, but unlike Calvin, the patterns are set in an apocalyptic approach. (243–4) See Childs, Struggle, 235–44. are often mysterious (1 Pet 1:10–12). Whereas pre-critical commentators may stretch the interpretative possibilities of the text through the use of figuration, 240 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) typology or allegory, critical commentators may fail to suggest potential exegetical or theological connections with the New Testament. In “Our Missional God: Redemptive Historical Preaching and the Missio Dei,”71 I argued for patience in interpreting texts messianically. I had observed Calvin’s reluctance and warning not to restrict the meaning of Old Testament texts. He comments, for example, on the suffering servant passage in Isaiah 50:4,

This passage is commonly explained so as to relate to Christ, as if it had not been applicable to the Prophet, because he afterwards says, that he had been beaten with rods, which we nowhere read was done to Isaiah. But there is no great force in this argument; for David complains that his garments were divided (Ps 22:18), which applies literally to Christ (Matt 27:35; John 19:24), and yet it does not follow that this did not happen to David himself. For my own part, I have no doubt, that Isaiah comes forward as one who represents all the servants of God, not only those who were from the beginning, but those who should come afterwards expectations.

Over the years I have taken the road less travelled by following Calvin’s caution. Evidently, his expositions are theocentric, but do occasionally border on the use of typological allegory.72 Calvin rejects allegories as being characterized by cleverness, subtlety, diabolic trickery, and frivolous, subtle trifling compared with what is a solid, simple, and genuine exposition,73 but is it possible that Calvin may still be accused of the sin he has condemned so harshly? In the light of his comments elsewhere, I would answer “yes” and “no.” On the one hand, he, like Augustine, attempts to look for a spiritual sense when the literal is difficult. On the other hand, he cuts through the usual hermeneutical steps to help the readers see the temporal progression of God’s kingdom from the perspective of Jesus’ First Advent. In Calvin’s self-perception, he clearly distinguishes typology from allegory, but his critics range from those

71. In Living Waters from Ancient Springs: Essays in Honor of Cornelis Van Dam, ed. Jason Van Vliet (Eugene Oregon: Pickwick, 2011,) 198–217. 72. Last year I lectured at Chongshin Theological Seminary on Calvin’s eschatological typology (Doctoral seminar, November 2, 2015). 73. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 107-8. See Calvin’s comment on Daniel 7:9, “I need not dwell longer on these forms of speech, though subtle allegories are pleasing to many. I am satisfied with holding what is solid and sure.” who say that he has “a weakness for typology” to those who charge him with bringing in allegory through typology.74 It is quite apparent that for Calvin the celestial hope is first and foremost lasting and unaffected by the corruption that characterizes life on earth. Moreover, the development of this hope is grounded on God’s commitment to creation. All things on earth will have to be renewed and all in Christ will undergo a complete renovated, the resurrection of the body. Calvin’s focus is not anthropological or ethnic. He looks at Jesus Christ, the head of the body, in whom the renewal of all Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 241 things is guaranteed. He sees no need to speculate.75 T. F. Torrance put it succinctly, “Calvin’s main teaching about eschatology is the application of Christology to the work of the church in history.”76 In union with Christ the church shares in the eschatological vision of the resurrection. Torrance explicates that this union entails that Christians “are already in the new creation” and that the new life in Christ is to be lived out “in the midst of history.”77 Calvin resists going beyond the vision of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus in the commenting on texts that are suggestive, evoke imagination or invite further investigation. This observation helps to explain the many comments on the hope of the prophets. They cast their eschatological hope in imagery suggestive of the renewal of this world. Calvin connects hope with the Lord Jesus. The future lies in Jesus, and there is no need for speculation or to “worry over details of time.”78 As to the visualization of the hope, Calvin is most reluctant, if not contrary in his attitude, “Now all those matters which elude our gaze and far exceed the capacity of our minds must either be believed as from actual oracles of God or utterly cast away.”79

74. Puckett, John Calvin’s Exegesis, 114. 75. William R. Stevenson observes that “Calvin was no millenarian speculator, because he had little faith in human capacity to know God’s plan for such speculation to erupt” (Sovereign Grace: The Place and Significance of Christian Freedom in John Calvin’s Political Thought [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999], 177, note 36). See also Richard Muller, The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of the Federal Tradition (New York: Oxford University press, 2000), 171. Harro Höpfl adds in a footnote (p. 280, note 17): “In his commentaries Calvin systematically ignored, attenuated or explained away as referring to the life-history of individuals the favorite texts of millenarians” (The Christian Polity of John Calvin [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985]). 76. T. F. Torrance “Foreword to the English Edition” of Heinrich Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things, tr. Harold Knight (Richmond: John Knox, 1955), 8. 77. Torrance, “Foreword…,” 8. 78. Calvin’s comment on Matthew 24:29, 36. 79. Inst. 111.xxv.5. Search for Wisdom in Appropriating the Ancient Text to a New Context:The Context of Calvin’s Lectures on Daniel (1559–1560) In dependence on the Spirit, Calvin searched for the meaning of the text to appropriate it in his own context. He repeatedly likens Daniel’s troubles to the experience of the Church. He had learned from Daniel that the Church should expect affliction and anguish in this world, because her members are pilgrims who are subject to convulsions, storms and warfare. Calvin prayed for their “happy rest” and the enjoyment of “the fruit of our victory.”80 He invited the French Christians to enter Daniel’s world and discover ways in which they must live out of the message of Daniel to prepare themselves for 242 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) other trials.81 Evidently, Calvin read the prophecy of Daniel as a manual for living wisely in a hostile world. As Daniel was seventy years in exile against his will, Calvin and the French refugees had been forced into exile. As Daniel did not have an opportunity to return, Calvin did not envision his return to France. As Daniel left a book as witness to God’s presence with him in exile, Calvin dedicated his exposition on Daniel to the Christians living in France (“to all the pious worshippers of God who desire the kingdom of Christ to be rightly constituted in France”).82 They had already endured thirty years

80. Calvin prays, “Grant, Almighty God, since thou desirest us to be tossed about amidst many and various convulsions, that our minds may always look upwards towards heaven, where thou hast prepared for us certain rest and a tranquil inheritance beyond the reach of disturbance and commotion. When the land through which we are on pilgrimage is in confusion, may we be so occupied during its storms, as to stand composed and grounded upon the faith of thy promises, until having discharged our warfare, we are gathered together into that happy rest, where we shall enjoy the fruit of our victory, in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.” (Prayer after Lecture 39) 81. Calvin wrote, “I have the very best occasion of showing you, beloved brethren, in this mirror, how God proves the faith of his people in these days by various trials; and how with wonderful wisdom he has taken care to strengthen their minds by ancient examples, that they should never be weakened by the concussion of the severest storms and tempests; or at least, if they should totter at all, that they should never finally fall away. For although the servants of God are required to run in a course impeded by many obstacles, yet whoever diligently reads this Book will find in it whatever is needed by a voluntary and active runner to guide him from the starting-post to the goal; while good and strenuous wrestlers will experimentally acknowledge that they have been sufficiently prepared for the contest.” (Dedicatory Epistle) 82. Calvin was committed to remain in Geneva, “Since, then, it is not lawful for me to desert the station to which God has appointed me, I have dedicated to you this my labor, as a pledge of my desire to help you, until at the completion of persecution, and Calvin had been a refugee for 26 years. As Daniel ministered indirectly to the community in exile, Calvin had continued to minister to the church in France through correspondence and the translation of his writings. He expounded the book of Daniel to provide a mirror for the persecuted church.83 Calvin was confident that the book of Daniel, as part of Scripture, is profitable and sufficient for the battle, “For although the servants of God are required to run in a course impeded by many obstacles, yet whoever diligently reads this Book will find in it whatever is needed by a voluntary and active runner to guide him from the starting-post to the goal; while good and strenuous wrestlers will experimentally acknowledge that they have been sufficiently prepared for the contest.” (Dedicatory Epistle) Calvin began lecturing on Daniel close to his fiftieth birthday (June 12, 1559), completed the sixty-six lectures in April 1560, and had the exposition published in 1561. These were difficult years, as Calvin saw himself more and more as “a soldier” of Jesus Christ.84 Living in the shadow of his own mortality, he prepared to leave a legacy both at the Geneva Academy, the St. Pierre Church, and the evangelical churches, especially the churches in his native France. At the Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 243 Academy he taught Old Testament from 1559 till his death in 1564. These years also saw a renewed persecution of the evangelical churches in France. The French refugees and the leaders of the Reformed churches were desperate, because the persecution had lasted some thirty years. They asked Calvin what he thought about a resistance movement against the French authorities. Calvin would not hear of it. Instead, he advised the Christians to suffer, remain patient, pray for deliverance, and be faithful to Christ during their persecution.85

of my pilgrimage our heavenly Father, of his immeasurable pity, shall gather me together with you, to his eternal inheritance. May the Lord govern you by His Spirit, may He defend my most beloved brethren by His own protection, against all the plots of their enemies, and sustain them by his invisible power.” (Dedicatory Epistle) 83. Calvin wrote, “… I have the very best occasion of showing you, beloved brethren, in this mirror, how God proves the faith of his people in these days by various trials; and how with wonderful wisdom he has taken care to strengthen their minds by ancient examples, that they should never be weakened by the concussion of the severest storms and tempests; ,,,” (“Dedicatory Epistle”) 84. Selderhuis, Calvin, 236–59. 85. Parker, Commentaries, 219–23; Calvin, 181–3. Calvin was forced to live like a pilgrim having been exiled from his native France,86 but found solace in God’s Word.87 Daniel, like David,88 became a paradigm for him. He found comfort in Daniel’s exilic experience and ministry. Life was difficult as he observed, “God everywhere lays traps for us, digs pits, throws all kinds of obstacles in our way and finally encloses us in the abyss.”89 Calvin longed to be with Christ, but valiantly fought for the authority of God’s Word against the Catholic claims of ecclesial authority. As his suffering became more intense, his own physical and spiritual limitations kept him occupied till his death in 1564.90 During these years he wrote, “Life becomes shorter. For that reason, we must simply acknowledge that our life disappears in the blink of an eye and flows away. … We are always heading toward death, it comes near to us, and we must in the end go for it.”91

Appropriation and Obedience The completion of the final revision of the Institutes had given him a sense of order in the chaos of life. At the age of twenty-six Calvin had the first edition of the Institutes published in Latin (1536). He continued revising it till the final Latin edition (1559), while also publishing it in French (1541–1560).92 He had found rest in discerning God’s wisdom, and the Institutes had become a cathedral93 where people could come to know God better, so as to live wisely to his glory and to read God’s Word with understanding.94 The first line of the Institutes is Calvin’s 244 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) opening salvo, “Nearly all the wisdom we possess, that is to say, true and sound wisdom, consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves.” Through the Institutes he opened a path for believers to discern God’s wisdom in his Word. He illumined the obscure through what is

86. Or ordo (Selderhuis, Calvin, 230). 87. Selderhuis writes, “Where the Word of God is preached, heard, and practiced, there is the Promised Land. There in fact, is heaven on earth.” Calvin, 43. 88. See Pierre Berthoud, “Calvin and the Psalms, A Renewed Understanding,” http://sesc-bg.org/files/CALVIN%20and%20thePsalms.pdf; O. Millet, Calvin. Un homme, une œuvre, un auteur (In folio: Gollion), 2008, 123. 89. Selderhuis, Calvin, 15. 90. Selderhuis: “Until the day he died, Calvin would find no rest” (Calvin, 53). 91. Cited by Selderhuis, Calvin, 250. 92. The Institutes grew from six to eighty chapters! 93. An image suggested by Parker, Calvin, 163. 94. Selderhuis: “Calvin’s exegetical work in the Holy Scriptures becomes more and more visible, and it can rightly be said that the Institutes grew from the expansion of Calvin’s knowledge of the Scriptures” (Calvin, 47). clear. In his lectures on Daniel, whose apocalyptic imagery is difficult to interpret, he wrestled with the “obscurity” of the prophecy.95 Though Calvin’s lexical, exegetical, and theological resources were limited, he had learned not to be afraid of complexity. He loved the humanistic approach in that it had opened the challenge of discovery by paying careful attention to the original languages of Scripture.96 Calvin entered the world of the text of Scripture with a desire to meet his Savior. He wrote that the divine-human encounter must lead to a life of obedience, “For God opens, as it were, his own heart to us, when he makes known to us his secrets by means of the Law, and the Prophets, and his Apostles also. … unless we obediently embrace the doctrine of the gospel; otherwise, we do our utmost to frustrate the designs of God and elude his counsels, unless we faithfully obey his word” (Comment on 9:22). We learn to appreciate how tightly interwoven Calvin’s argument is. He is not a moralist, though his appropriation of the text may occasionally sound as if he is. He is redemptive-historical in his approach, because he expects, longs for, and searches for God’s glorious redemption in Christ. Calvin writes, “But the pursuit of piety will never flourish in us as it ought, until we learn to raise our minds upwards, since they are too inclined to grovel upon earth, and we should exercise them in continual meditation upon the heavenly life” (Dedicatory Epistle). Calvin saw in Daniel a type of Christ. The prefiguration is shown in Daniel’s walk with God, his obedience to him, his confidence in God’s ability to raise him from the dead, and in his witness to earthly powers. Calvin writes,

A similar contest and victory of Daniel himself will be added; when he preferred to be cast among savage lions, to desisting from the open pro- Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 245 95. Calvin comments, “This passage has been variously treated, and so distracted, and almost torn to pieces by the various opinions of interpreters, that it might be considered nearly useless on account of its obscurity. But, in the assurance that no prediction is really in vain, we may hope to understand this prophecy, provided only we are attentive and teachable according to the angel’s admonition, and the Prophet’s example. I do not usually refer to conflicting opinions, because I take no pleasure in refuting them, and the simple method which I adopt pleases me best, namely, to expound what I think (is) delivered by the Spirit of God. on Daniel, comment on Daniel 9:24. 96. Calvin also invites some in his audience to go beyond him by studying the ancient sources, … let any studious person, endued with acuteness, experience, and skill, discover whatever has been written in Greek and Latin, and distinguish the testimony of each writer under distinct heads, and afterwards compare the writers together, and determine the credibility of each, and how far each is a fit and classical authority, he will find the same result as that here given by the Prophet” (9:25). fession of his faith three times a-day; lest by perfidious dissembling he should prostitute the Sacred Name of God to the jests of the impious. Thus he was wonderfully drawn out of the pit which was all but his grave, and triumphed over Satan and his faction. (Dedicatory Epistle)

Calvin also understood the prefiguration in relation to all who follow Jesus Christ. Since Christ, the Head of the Church, is in heaven, he challenged his readers to distinguish between what is ephemeral and what is eternal, “we must be so built up therein, that all impiety and worldly desires must be mortified, and we must live soberly, justly, and piously in this world, and wait for the blessed hope, and glorious advent of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. (Titus 2:12, 13)” (Dedicatory Epistle). Regardless how much Calvin and the French Christians had suffered, he realistically expected that the battle would continue.97 The path of suffering might reveal a “beautiful orthodoxy” with a character shaped by faithfulness, mercy, resilience, perseverance, and mortification of the flesh.98

Conclusions This brief study on John Calvin’s exegetical and pastoral practices reveals the beauty and benefit of integration. Calvin aimed at integrating the theological disciplines (exegetical, biblical, systematic, historical, practical) to come to know his Savior, himself, and the world. He developed a deep and dialogical knowledge of his Savior99 in a relentless

97. Calvin: “But if ye must contend still longer, (and I announce, that contests more severe than ye contemplate yet remain for you,) by whatsoever attack the madness of the impious bursts forth, as if it stirred up the regions below, remember that your course has been defined by a heavenly Master of the contest, whose laws ye must obey the more cheerfully, since he will supply you with strength unto the end” (Dedicatory Epistle). 98. This reformational and reformed way of life is an example of “beautiful orthodoxy” of which Mark Galli writes, “We, therefore, as Christ’s followers, must continue to look to him who is above—and within—this broken world. We must rely on the mercy of God to do the good. We must seek and know the personal presence of Jesus Christ as we speak the truth. And we must want to be not merely a good and truthful 246 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) presence in the world, but one that reflects the very mysterious beauty of God as well. Even in our own suffering. This is beautiful orthodoxy. We cannot hope to live it perfectly, but the Lord is gracious and will use even our meager efforts for his glory. And as we seek to live it, he promises to make himself known as the one who can turn the world’s mourning— and ranting and raging—into joy and dancing.” (“Beautiful Orthodoxy: What the world— and the church—needs now,” Christianity Today, September 23, 2016). 99. Parker suggests that the true genius of Calvin’s theology lies in its search for rest. He became more and more aware of “the other world” of beauty, order, and peace. Calvin was Christocentric.100 In his expositions he saw signs of the outworking of God’s purposes in Jesus Christ. He made strides at a straightforward understanding of the text, while seeing the shadows and figures of Christ’s Kingdom. The shadows suggested to him the perpetuity, excellence, and glory of the messianic reign, and hence, were treated as prophecies. But in so doing, he searched for figurations and patterns, rather than details or predictions. After all, shadows are suggestive of reality. I envy Calvin’s pre-critical engagement with the text. He was critically aware, but had not met modernity with its rigorous demands of proof, accuracy, reality, reliability, authenticity, and certainty.101 The spade of critical commentaries on the OT exacerbate the alien nature of the OT in distinction from the New Testament. I strongly encourage you to use pre-critical commentaries and expositions as well, especially when the authors demonstrate competent knowledge of the biblical text and understand the divine intent by the principle of the analogy of faith. Such authors were faithful to the Gospel by suggesting connections, because they inhabited the text, appropriated it, and poetically observed the shadows and the colorful reality in Christ. They can teach us how to SEE Jesus in all of Scripture. Their “paintings” may be old, but are classic and are often preferable to the abstractions favored by modernity.

dialogical function: the knowledge of God and of self (Parker, Calvin, 162). The Geneva Catechism (1542) was intended to provide such a framework for children, whereas the Institutes was more appropriate for students of theology. The Heidelberg Catechism got it right by using the first person language, but also the believer’s assurance lies in participation with the Trinity. Question 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death? Answer: That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him. 100. Though Calvin is theocentric in his approach, as I argue in my article (“Our Missional God, 198-217), the intent of his theocentricity is to set Christ apart as the key to Old and New. Calvin’s typological approach is evidently Christocentric. 101. Brevard S. Childs observes “One of the effects of Calvin’s biblical exegesis is that there never developed for him ‘an ugly’ ditch (Lessing) that separated Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 247 scientific, historical interpretation from the existential needs of his hearers.” (The Struggle to understand Isaiah, 227. Calvin accomplished much in his short life. He desired to know the Triune God of tota Scriptura in God’s revelation in Jesus Christ. This quest took Calvin a lifetime. He evidently loved the Scriptures, walked with the Lord Jesus, gave himself for the sake of the Church, and ministered faithfully to God’s people during a distressing epoch in the history of the Church. He tirelessly prepared the foundations of the Reformed witness to his Savior and Lord in all areas of life, and finally he found rest in his death. May we learn to BE servants of Jesus Christ, so that we may give ourselves to know the Lord Jesus Christ with a heart like John Calvin.102

Works Cited Beale, G. K. “New Testament Hermeneutics.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 25–38. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Belcher, Jr., Richard P. “The Seventy Weeks in Daniel 9.” In A BiblicalTheological Introduction to the Old Testament: The Gospel Promised, edited by Miles V. Van Pelt, 543–46. Wheaton: Crossway, 2016. Benge, Dustin W. Lifting Up Our Hearts. Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012. Berthoud, Pierre. “Calvin and the Psalms, A Renewed Understanding.” http://sesc- bg.org/files/CALVIN%20and%20thePsalms.pdf. Board of Trustees, “Appendix B: Affirmations and Denials Regarding Recent Issues.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 63–78. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Childs, Brevard S. The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Duguid, Iain M. “Old Testament Hermeneutics.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 17–24. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Evans, William B. “Has Westminster Seminary Changed? More Reflections on WTS’s Actions Regarding OT Professor Doug Green’s Un-

102. Sinclair B. Ferguson, “Calvin the Man: A Heart Aflame,” in Calvin, Theologian, and Reformer, ed. Joel R. Beeke and Gary J. Williams (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010). derstanding of the New Testament’s Use of the Old.” http://theaquilareport.com/has-westminster-seminary-changed/. 248 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) ______. “How Much Did the OT Writers Know? (2): The Spectre of Bibliological Eutychianism.” https://theecclesialcalvinist.wordpress. com/2014/07/03/how-much-did-the-ot-writers-know-2-the-spectreof- bibliological-eutychianism/. Sinclair B. Ferguson, “Calvin the Man: A Heart Aflame.” In Calvin, Theologian, and Reformer, edited by Joel R. Beeke and Gary J. Williams, 7–24. Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010. Gaffin, R. B. “Systematic Theology and Hermenutics.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 39–52. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Galli, Mark. “Beautiful Orthodoxy: What the world—and the church— needs now.” Christianity Today, September 23, 2016. Gordon, Bruce. Calvin. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Holst, Matthew. “Christocentric or Christomonic? We Should be Careful in Preaching Christ from the Scriptures to the Exclusion of the Father and the Spirit.” The Aquila Report, Monday, November 3, 2014. http://theaquilareport.com/christocentric-or-christomonic/. Höpfl, Harro. The Christian Polity of John Calvin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Kraus, H. J. “Calvin’s Exegetical Principles.” Interp 31 (1977): 8–18. Levenson, Jon D. Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1985. Lillback, Peter A., ed. Seeing Christ in all of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Machen, J. Gresham. “Westminster Theological Seminary: Its Purpose and Plan.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 53–62. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. Millet, O. Calvin. Un homme, une œuvre, un auteur. In folio: Gollion, 2008. Muller, Richard A. “The Hermeneutic of Promise and Fulfillment in Calvin’s Exegesis of the Old Testament Promises of the Kingdom.” In The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, edited by David C. Steinmetz, 68–82. Durham: Duke University Press, 1990. ______. The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of the Federal Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Newbigin, Leslie. Proper Confidence: Faith, Doubt, and Certainty in Christian Discipleship. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Ortlund, Dane C. “Christocentrism: An Asymmetrical Trinitarianism?” Themelios 34.3 (2009): 309–21. Christocentricity and Appropriation in Calvin’s Exposition of Daniel 249 Parker, T. H. L. Calvin’s Old Testament Commentaries. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, Press, 1986. ______. John Calvin: A Biography. Louisville: WJK, 2007. Poythress, Vern. “Biblical Hermeneutics.” In Seeing Christ in All of Scripture: Hermeneutics at Westminster Theological Seminary, edited by Peter A. Lillback, 9–16. Philadelphia: Westminster Seminary Press, 2016. ______. “Divine Meaning of Scripture.” WTJ 48 (1986): 241–79. Puckett, David L. John Calvin’s Exegesis of the Old Testament. Louisville: Westminster/Knox, 1995. Rose, Wolter H. “Messianic Expectations in the Old Testament.” Die Skriftig 35.2 (2001): 275–88. ______. Zemah and Zerubbabel: Messianic Expectations in the Early Postexilic Period, JSOTSS 304. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press: 2000. Selderhuis, Herman J. John Calvin: A Pilgrim’s Life. Downers Grove: IVP, 2009. Stevenson, William R. Sovereign Grace: The Place and Significance of Christian Freedom in John Calvin’s Political Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Thompson, John L. “Calvin as Biblical Interpreter.” In The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin, edited by Donald K. McKim, 58–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Torrance, T. F. “Foreword to the English Edition” of Heinrich Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things, translated by Harold Knight. Richmond: John Knox, 1955. Vangemeren, Willem A. “A Well-Founded Hope: Old Testament Perspectives on Hope and Anguish.” Lecture at the annual meeting of the Fellows of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity on February 5, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l77XajRTCuA&list=PLPF5Cjf6CUNnet HTYHhYerQSVP1sqZYb. ______. Interpreting the Prophetic Word, ______. “Israel as the Hermeneutical Crux in the Interpretation of Prophecy, Part I.” WTJ 45 (1983): 32–145. ______. “Israel as the Hermeneutical Crux in the Interpretation of Prophecy, Part II.” WTJ 46 (1984): 254–97. ______. Living Waters from Ancient Springs: Essays in Honor of Cornelis Van Dam, edited by Jason Van Vliet, 198-217. Eugene: Pickwick, 2011. ______. “Our Missional God: Redemptive Historical Preaching and the Missio Dei.” In Living Waters from Ancient Springs: Essays in Honor of Cornelis Van Dam, edited by Jason Van Vliet, 198–217. Eugene: Pickwick, 2011. 250 Torch Trinity Journal 19 (2016) ______. The Progress of Redemption: The Story of Salvation from Creation to the New Jerusalem. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988; Baker, 1995.

Key words: Christocentric, Christomonic, Law and Gospel, Old and New, pattern fulfillment, promise and fulfillment, messianic expectations, Obedience, redemptive historical preaching, tota Scriptura, typology. (그리스도중심적인, 그리스도 1 위의, 율법과 복음, 오래된 것 과 새 것, 정형화된 성취, 약속과 성취, 메시아적 기대, 순종, 구속사적 인 설교, 성경 전체, 예형론)

(Received: November 14, 2016; Revised: November 24, 2016; Accepted: November 30, 2016) 한글초록 최근 웨스트민스터신학교(필라델피아)의 교수 위원회가 분명한 웨 스트민스터 해석학에 대한 해명이 구약 성서 강해와 결부된 것에 대한 내 자신의 설명에 긍적적인 영향을 미쳤다. 나는 지난 40 년 이상의 기 간동안 구약과 신약과의 관계에 대한 연구에 열중하는 동안 메시아적 기대에 대한 칼빈의 미묘한 접근에 대해 조금씩 연구할 기회를 가졌다. 그것은 해석의 패턴에 대한 연구를 통해 본문 강해와 다른 본문과의 연 결고리로 그 본문을 타당하게 하는 그리스도 중심적인 해석의 형태다. 이것을 위해 나는 칼빈의 다니엘에 대한 강해에 집중했다. 나는 본문의 타당성에 대한 칼빈의 목회적 접근에 있어서 다섯 가지 차원을 추적했 다. 즉, 1) 본문 연구, 2) 그리스도 안에서 하나님의 계시에 대한 깊은 지식, 3) 양식(유형)에 대한 분별로 이끄는 본문과 다른 본문과의 연관 성, 4) 본문을 강해하고 설교하는데 어떤 방향으로 참여해야 할지에 대 한 현명한 판단, 그리고 5) 신실한 선포가 순종과 봉사를 주는 생명으 로 인도하는 하나님의 말씀이어야 한다. 그리스도 중심의 설교는 본문 에 의해 제시된 메시아적 기대에 집중함으로써 이 다섯 가지 측면을 포 함한다. 그런 기대감은 강해가 본문의 여러가지 차원을 합치는 것처럼 예형론적 스펙트럼을 제시한