A Full-Stored Treasury of Sound Theology
Many Johannine tomes are more concerned with rethinking Christology rather than relishing in the old paths, more concerned with literary critique than looking at Jesus, more concerned with hypothesized compositional layers than the coming of the God-man to save sinners. Hutcheson’s aim in writing this commentary ought to be the aim of every biblical commentator—”to do service to the church of Christ in my generation, and to contribute my endeavours for promoting that public design of making the holy scriptures yet more clear unto the Lord’s people.”
One of the reasons I frequent used bookstores is the promise of hidden treasure. Buried beneath stacks of tottering books with faded covers can lie treasure of immeasurable value—gems forgotten by the passage of time. To discover that gem is like knowing a delicious secret before anyone else. I found that secret gem one morning when I stumbled upon The Exposition of the Gospel according to John by the Scottish Covenanter, George Hutcheson.
Hutcheson’s work contains all the hallmarks of robust Puritanism—doctrinal precision with heartwarming devotion to Christ. It is no wonder, then, that Hutcheson was one of Charles Spurgeon’s favorites. Hutcheson’s commentary on John was Spurgeon’s favorite to consult. He said of it, “Excellent; beyond all praise. It is a full-stored treasury of sound theology, holy thought, and marrowy doctrine.”1
For many today, however, George Hutcheson remains a stranger. Hutcheson (1615-1674) was a Church of Scotland minister, biblical commentator, and key figure in the events involving the Scottish Covenanters. He was educated at the University of Edinburgh (MA, 1638) and pastored in the villages of Colmonell and Irvine in the county of Ayrshire. He was close friends with David Dickson, another prominent Scottish Covenanting minister, biblical commentator, and Principal of the University of Glasgow. Hutcheson wrote other commentaries, such as A Brief Exposition of the Twelve Minor Prophets (1653-5), An Exposition of the Book of Job (1669), and more.2
Overview of Work
The Exposition of the Gospel according to John (1657) originated from Hutcheson’s preaching notes on the Gospel of John, likely from sermons preached at Colmonell, Ayrshire. Hutcheson explains in the introduction how he prioritized writing this commentary after he was faced with his mortality from some unknown incident. In the shadow of his own finitude, Hutcheson wrote this work to point to the infinite Son of God, who is “the fountain and preserver of life in living creatures” and who “hath undertaken to work the work of redemption of sinners, and so hath engaged himself to carry it through” (12, 84).
The commentary is a mid-sized volume of 439 pages. However, due to the density of the exposition and Hutcheson’s ability to make every word count, it feels more thorough and comprehensive than the largest contemporary tomes on John. The structure of the commentary is a combination of explanation and application. Hutcheson walks through the entire Gospel verse-by- verse. He first explains each verse and how it relates to the overall scheme of John’s narrative. Then, he has a section labeled “Doctrines,” which is a numbered list of various systematic doctrines and practical applications of the verse.
The explanations of the verses are clear and useful, but what makes this commentary stand out is the depth of doctrinal clarity and the breadth of application after each verse. Hutcheson combines lucid dogmatic explanation with sensitive pastoral application. For example, consider how in the space of a brief paragraph Hutcheson goes from elucidating the unity of the divine essence and the distinction of the persons in the Godhead, to redemptive-covenantal language, to an encouragement for believers to trust in Christ because of his nature and offices:
“The Son’s coexistence with the Father is also a matter seriously to be considered by believers, wherein they may see the deep wisdom and rich love of God, who hath found a way of reconciliation of lost man by the same in nature and essence who is the party offended, and that the unity of the divine essence and the distinction of persons should contribute to make the redemption and reconciliation of lost man effectual by him; wherein also believers, who have fled to Christ for refuge, may not only find him to be true God, able to supply all wants, and to save to the uttermost, but may also find the Father in the Mediator, as being one in essence with him.” (11).
Hutcheson and Reformed Orthodoxy
Spurgeon’s description of Hutcheson as a “full-stored treasury of sound theology” is certainly apt. Hutcheson’s exposition is a theologically sound distillation of the basic tenets of Reformed orthodoxy. His exegesis is doctrinal and biblical; his understanding of the Trinity and Christology is classical and conciliar; and his articulation of soteriology is set within the broader framework of covenant theology. Not only is the content of Hutcheson’s exposition markedly Reformed, but his method of exposition is reflective of earlier theologians, such as the sixteenth-century Reformed scholastic theologian, Girolamo Zanchi. R. A. Muller notes, Hutcheson’s style of adding “a series of doctrinal loci at the end of the exposition of each pericope” is similar to Girolamo Zanchi.3
-
Counter-Attack in the War Against Reality
Written by Terry L. Johnson |
Monday, July 4, 2022The June 24 Dobbs decision is not a pro-life decision. It is a pro-constitution (in which there is no right to abortion) and anti-court decisions made by judicial fiat (like Roe v. Wade). It restores the question of abortion to the people and their elected representatives. It is the first check in what has been a tidal wave of victories for liberal, secular, progressive ideology stretching back over decades.
The June 24 reversal of the Roe v. Wade decision signals the first successful counterattack in the decades long war against reality. We might also designate it a war against women as women. At the heart of the progressive/liberal ideology is the intention to eliminate all distinctions between men and women in favor of typical male interests and inclinations. Men stereotypically prioritize career over family and sexual adventurism over sexual fidelity. Women, they say, must be able to do the same. Natural, biological, physiological, and emotional priorities of real women must be jettisoned for the superior (?) values of men. The transgender movement is the logical and absurd culmination of that trajectory: men (those with male bodies) can actually be women, and women (those with female bodies) can actually be men. The reality of biological sex (gender), that is unalterable in the real world, nevertheless, cannot be allowed to limit the “expressive self,” one’s own definition of what and who one is.
The roots of this conflict with reality can be found in the modern feminist movement. Women can never be equal with men, it is argued, if pregnancy is allowed to disrupt one’s aspirations. Men are able to participate in sexual promiscuity without consequences. Their futures, their plans are not at-risk when they recklessly consummate their lusts/desires. However, women may be hindered from getting their high school diploma, or their college degree, or promotion on the job because of an unwanted pregnancy. They are not free to fulfill their sexual lives like men are. Because in a post-Freudian world sexual fulfillment is the chief end of man, this biological reality, it is argued, is intolerable.
The only solution to this inequity is to grant women the right to terminate their pregnancies. Only then will they be able to pursue both sexual fulfillment as well as social and vocational success on equal terms with men. Thus, two monumental movements joined hands in common cause: the sexual revolution and the feminist movement. From these then flow their offspring: the full LBGTQ+ agenda.
What reality is being overlooked? Start with the obvious: the child targeted for abortion. Once conception takes place, there now exists in the real world a distinctive human being. It has a unique genetic code that differs from that of the mother and father. All that separates it from an adult human is time and nutrition. We all once were fetal humans.
Remarkably this reality is almost always ignored by the pro-abortion movement. Their entire argument is for the rights of the woman, her control over her own body, and so on. The rights of the unborn are dropped en toto. The human life developing in the womb simply doesn’t exist except as a thing to eliminate.
Is there more? Yes. The real-world differences between men and women are ignored. Men do not and cannot get pregnant. A human life cannot grow within a man. This most glorious of human phenomena is limited to women. He cannot provide the nurturing environment in which that development takes place. He does not and cannot develop emotion bonds with that developing life. He does not and cannot develop the maternal instinct to protect and provide for the child that is growing within her. No amount of philosophical sophistry can remove this most basic difference between men and women.
What this means is that women can never engage in sexual relations as recklessly as do men. This is true if for no other reason than the woman gets the abortion, not the man. She suffers the painful emotional, physical, and spiritual consequences of that abortion, he does not. Abortion may reduce some consequences of pregnancy (e.g., interference with one’s plans) but creates others at the same time. She suffers the sadness, the sorrow, the regret, and the feelings of guilt for killing the baby that would have been.
The June 24 Dobbs decision is not a pro-life decision. It is a pro-constitution (in which there is no right to abortion) and anti-court decisions made by judicial fiat (like Roe v. Wade). It restores the question of abortion to the people and their elected representatives. It is the first check in what has been a tidal wave of victories for liberal, secular, progressive ideology stretching back over decades. It will force the nation to discuss the differences between men and women, the biological and other consequences of sexual relations (even that there are consequences), what abortion actually is, and what is the best environment in which conceptions should take place (i.e., marriage), and children should be reared (with a mother and father).
We will join that discussion, and hope to see good come from it. When humanity wars against reality, reality always wins. Maybe this judicial counter-attack will make that fact more apparent.
Terry Johnson is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is Pastor of Independent Presbyterian Church in Savannah, Ga.
Related Posts: -
Prone to Wander, Prone to Leave the Gospel We Love
Something similar happened in Corinth during Paul’s missionary days (circa AD 53–54). Just a few short years after Paul brought the gospel to these saints, they were already out of the honeymoon phase. One group in the church favored Paul, the apostle and planter of the church. Others sided with Apollos, the eloquent Alexandrian (Acts 18:24). They were caught up in mere men rather than the God-man, and it was bringing deadly sepsis to their local body. In addition to the division there was grievous sin, idolatry, impure worship, and false teaching threatening to flatline the Corinthian church.
A Fresh Application of the Gospel
Paul, under the guidance of the Great Physician, sought to bring healing to the Corinthian church. Near the end of his first letter to the Corinthians, he urged them to focus on what was “of first importance” (1 Cor. 15:3). As a way of reminder, he once again declared the gospel to the Corinthians. They needed a fresh application of the message that brought them from death to life. As redeemed people, we too are prone to forget the most powerful message in all of the universe. We need to be constantly drawn back to the good news of Jesus Christ.
Before expounding the gospel to the Corinthians, Paul reminded them of four aspects of the gospel that are equally relevant for the bride of Christ today:The gospel message was preached to them. Who can hear the gospel message without a preacher (Rom. 10:14)? It was Paul himself who “planted” the gospel seeds by preaching to them, and he stood so firmly in the message that he could call it “my gospel” (1 Cor. 1:6; Rom. 16:25).
The gospel message was received by them. The Corinthians had welcomed Paul and received the words he preached, and he was confident to call them brothers and sisters in the Lord. He addressed them as the church at Corinth because he was confident that the gospel had transformed them and made them new creatures.
They made their stand in the gospel message. When they heard the gospel, they responded and found their standing in that message, and they were still standing in that message when Paul wrote to them. They continued to stand firm as they trusted the work of Christ on their behalf.
Read More
-
Covenant College Announces Interim President Dr. Brad Voyles to Serve Beginning July 1st, 2023
(Lookout Mountain, GA) – Today [3/31/23], the Covenant College Board of Trustees announced that they have appointed Dr. Brad Voyles as interim president beginning July 1st, 2023. He will serve as interim president until President Halvorson’s successor has been selected to assume office, which is expected to occur on or before July 1, 2024.
Having served for 18 years at Covenant as vice president for student development and dean of students, Dr. Voyles brings a deep understanding of the operations of the college and a clear view with regard to Covenant’s distinctive mission in the landscape of higher education.
Dean Voyles received his B.A. from DePauw University where he majored in Biological Sciences and minored in Psychology. After earning an MS Ed. in Higher Education Administration from Southern Illinois University, Voyles completed his Master of Divinity degree from Reformed Theological Seminary while working as Dean of Students at Belhaven University. In 2014, he earned his doctorate in Education Leadership and Policy from Vanderbilt University.
While serving as vice president of student development, Voyles has also played key roles in strategic planning, leading crisis response efforts including the college’s COVID-19 response, supervising key areas during times of transition, and building strong teams in his areas of oversight. He has served on the cabinet of two of the college’s presidents and is excited to continue serving with the support of a gifted and experienced cabinet.
In an announcement to the community, Chair of the Board of Trustees R. Craig Wood stated, “I am delighted with this decision. Brad’s contributions and service to the college over the past 18 years have prepared him well to bridge the gap as interim president, and to begin immediate work on the college’s short-term and longer term strategic planning with the gifted cabinet that is already in place and approved by the Board.”
Dean Voyles shared in the announcement to the community that he is “grateful for the trust extended to me by the Board and for the gifted colleagues I have the privilege of serving with across campus. The faculty and staff who serve at Covenant are our greatest resource and through whom the Lord accomplishes our mission of maturing students in the areas of identity in Christ, biblical frame of reference, and service that is Christ-like.”
The Board of Trustees has launched the presidential search committee, made up of trustees, trustee advisers, faculty, and staff.
Source
