Book I, Chapters 6-10

Calvin wrote this in his conclusion to Chapter 5,

"...it is very true that we are not at all sufficiently instructed by this bare and simple testimony which the creatures render splendidly to the glory of God."

That is, General Revelation isn't enough. We need more specific testimony concerning God, ourselves, and our relationship to Him. For that, Scripture is necessary, and it is to Scripture, which Calvin calls, "that better help" that he next turns.

It doesn't not take him long to refute what his editors said of his view of Scripture in the Introduction. Calvin believes that God does not use merely "mute teachers" (General Rev.), "but also opens his own most hallowed lips." That sounds very much like a statement of verbal inspiration.

Once again, Calvin shows himself to be an exegetical theologian, as he looks to the Psalms as the basis of his instruction.

It is here, in Calvin's doctrine of Scripture, that we see for the first time a clear picture of his historical context as he addresses the relationship between the church and Scripture, while setting forth a strong statement of Sola Scriptura. It is the Scripture which stands over the Church, rather than Rome's position of the Church over Scripture. This too, is founded upon Scripture, as Calvin appeals to Ephesians 2:20.

We also find Calvin's Presuppositional apologetic at this point, when he argues that the Scriptures are self-authenticating.

"Scripture exhibits fully as clear evidence of its own truth as white and black things do of their color, or sweet and bitter things do of their taste."

His contention, in this respect, is that the ultimate proof of Divine authorship of Scripture lies not in arguments, ala, Josh McDowell, but rather in the witness of the Holy Spirit. Chapter 8, section 5 is an excellent statement of the Presuppositional position, although, I wonder if he does not take it too far when he says that "it is not right to subject it to proof and reasoning."

Even Van Til and Bahnsen saw a place for evidence, though certainly not a primary place. Paul himself, "reasoned" with those he sought to reach. Perhaps, though, Calvin is saying precisely this, that we do not subject Scripture to proof and reasoning in such a way that our reason sits in judgment over the Scripture. The more I read him, the more I think that this is most likely what he intended. He does, after all, go on in Chapter 8 to discuss "proofs" of the credibility of Scripture, such as its orderliness, Divine character, and its harmony.

Having mentioned Josh McDowell in passing, he was brought to mind in another context in regard to Chapter 8, section 9. Calvin mentions those in his own day who denied the Mosaic authorship of the Mosaic books, and denied that the prophets who are named in Scripture are the actual authors of their own books. We tend to think that these challenges arose in the 19th century with German higher criticism, but apparently, they have been around longer than that. What I found interesting is that Calvin used the same argument against them that later apologists like McDowell and others would use. Namely, that if you call the Scripture into doubt, then you fall into a skepticism from which we must doubt Plato and Aristotle and Cicero, etc.

Once again, I am impressed by the fact that we moderns aren't so clever after all. We stand on the shoulders of giants.