Turretin says that the distinction between the secret and the revealed will of God corresponds to the distinction between the decretive and the preceptive will.

I wonder, though, if it would be incorrect to point out that according to the meaning of the words secret and revealed, the correspondence may be general, but is not exact. Because as the decree is executed in history, at least those aspects of its execution that are knowable by us pass from the category of secret to revealed.

However it seems unlikely that Turretin would miss this point, so I wonder if I am overlooking something.

__________________
Ruben
Moderator
F.P.C.I.
Indiana

Vanities and disguises have covered us, and thereby we are naked; licenciousness hath inflam'd us, and thereby we are frozen; voluptuousness hath fed us, and thereby we are sterved, the fancies and traditions of men have taught and instructed us, and thereby we are ignorant.
John Donne

Board Rules - Signature Requirements - Suggestions?

Calvinistas Conversando
Teología en Mexico
The Howling Wilderness

Wouldn't you agree, however, that the Decree is still hidden even if, Providentially, we see in part? We might see historical events unfolding but we don't know how, precisely, they are being woven together to God's purposes.

__________________
Rich
PCA, Northern VA
Student, New Geneva Theological Seminary

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

True, but at one point it was hidden from Abraham that Isaac would not die at his hand, and at another it was revealed. That's why it seems like the distinctions are different, and address different aspects of our apprehension of God's will.

I see Turretin viewing the Scriptures as God's "revealed will" (en toto) and his dealings with men (now in time) as according to his "secret will"? In this sense, I see the correspondence between "secret/revealed" and "decretive/preceptive" as valid and precise. However, I also feel that the decretive/preceptive terminology is a clearer way to present it.

The progressive disclosure of God's plan for Abraham in Scripture is all part of his "revealed will" to us.

__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA

Ruben, I don't recall if Turretin notes that linguistic "problem," but he certainly would have been aware of it, others having noted it before him. For instance, Polanus:

The secret will, also, in its own appointed time is opened and made known by God. (Partitiones, I)

__________________
Paul Korte
OPC
Flint, MI

They who perceive in themselves discoveries of the divine goodness, so full and absolutely perfect, and who make them the subject of earnest meditation, will never embrace new doctrines, by which the very grace they feel so powerfully in themselves is thrown into the shade. --John Calvin

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Paul, Turretin is aware of the question. Thus he says, "It is called a secret will, not because always concealed from us and never revealed (for frequently God in his word manifests to men certain secrets of his counsel and lays them bare by the event), but because they remain hidden in God (until he reveals them by some sign, as by a prophecy or by the event)." (III.15.XXVI)

Those qualifications make me wonder why Berkhof can call the distinction between "secret and revealed" the most common: it does not seem as explanatory as decretive and preceptive, eudokias and euarestias or signi and beneplaciti.

Of course, it's been several nights since I slept properly so that may have something to do with my question!

I have no problem with making distinction between decretive and preceptive revelations of God's will.

What I question is whether there is any differance in the Sovereign purposes, underwriting the two?

I firmly refuse to believe that there are two (contradicting) wills abiding in the Person of God.

__________________
Ronda Rush
Church of the Redeemer
Independent Reformed
California


" . . .It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.'" Matthew 4:4

Ruben, please forgive my previous gross oversimplification of your question! I should always know to read more deeply into your questions. And also thanks for quoting Turretin to me! It's always embarrassing when I don't remember a distinction he makes.

Although at this time of night, this post probably won't be too helpful, I'd refer you to volume 3 of Muller (p. 456-469), though I'm quite certain you're more familiar with the passage than I am. Muller does note the beneplacti/signi distinction as the most basic (apparently in contradiction to Berkhof), and then discusses the other distinctions in the light thereof, providing some historical information as to why the different distinctions were used for different nuances (even though they are quite similar).

I guess my only confusion (on my end, I'm sure -- not from any lack on your part) is what you're sensing Turretin may be missing. I'm just not sure exactly what the question being posed is.

No, God's will is one, and is His essence and His nature: there is no mere wishing or any form of inefficacious will in God. My question is related more to why we use "secret" and "revealed" as functional synonyms for "decretive" and "preceptive" when they don't seem to cover the same aspects, and why, if it is not the most helpful distinction it is (one of) the most common.

Don't worry, Paul! Yesterday riding home I was not sure I understood my question, and became concerned that I had conflated Berkhof and Turretin. I thought of Muller, but v.3 happens to be on loan at the moment. Please don't feel badly for not having Turretin memorized: when someone apologizes for not performing works of supererogation, the rest of us who have neglected all counsels of perfection are reminded of our mortality.

Ruben, you are too funny.

Embarrassing admission -- I don't own a copy of Berkhof. Can I still call myself Reformed? You have piqued my curiosity, however, and I will read the appropriate passage in him in the next few days.

I've been reviewing Berkhof a little bit lately, and I find that the statements of which I think "Wow, that's really perspicacious" are the words that follow "Dr Bavinck says".

Does this problem/confusion identical occur in the original Latin, or could this merely be an outcropping of the inefficiency of English translation?

Theognome

__________________
Bill Cunningham
Covenant Reformed Church, URC
Kansas City
There are three kinds of people- those who can count, and those who can't.

Bill, yes, the terms all indicate the same thing in Latin as in English.

Is the differentiation merely one of aspects of our apprehension? Isn't the essence of the decretive (or hidden) will one of aseity? It seems like the terms are just another way of distinguishing between archetypal and ectypal theology.

"It is called a secret will, not because always concealed from us and never revealed (for frequently God in his word manifests to men certain secrets of his counsel and lays them bare by the event), but because they remain hidden in God (until he reveals them by some sign, as by a prophecy or by the event)." (III.15.XXVI)

If I may, "secret will" as it is being used here, seems to pertain to matters of wisdom, not precept. In other words, Turretin seems to be suggesting that contrary to what is always revealed in God's word regarding "shalls and shall nots" (i.e. precepts), matters of good, better and best are often hidden until God makes things most clear. I don't agree with that theology, that we can ever "know" in this regard; yet notwithstanding I believe we can find peace in our decisions after prayerfully searching ourselves for hidden motives and deceptions, and after we submit ourselves in humility to God's goodness, having full confidence that He will work our decisions to his glory and our profit.

That's the best I can do...

Ron

__________________
Ronald W. DiGiacomo / Ruling Elder
Christ Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Elkton, Maryland

http://reformedapologist.blogspot.com

I am going to have to go get Turretin out of storage.

__________________
Benjamin P. Glaser, M. Div, Licentiate, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
Member Fairmount ARP Church
Pittsburgh, PA

Deo Vindice

If it were another way of distinguishing between archetypal and ectypal theology, though, it doesn't seem to me like it would be represented as largely overlapping with decretive and preceptive. Archetypal theology would not be revealed by any event, and ectypal theology includes far more than precepts.