Johannes Marck’s Marrow of Christian Theology, Didactic-Elenctic XIV

CHAPTER XIV

Of the State of Integrity

---

I. The state of man is fourfold: instituted, destitute, restored, and constituted; or established, fallen, renewed, and confirmed. The first, in which Adam was created, is otherwise called the state of innocence, rectitude, and integrity.

II. While man possessed this state, he was placed in Paradise, whose history must by no means be turned into a mere allegory. That eastern name signifies a greater and more splendid garden. It was certainly in some part of the earth, not separated from our world, but probably in Mesopotamia, or in the region of Babylonia, where Eden and the confluence of rivers were. It was furnished with all abundance and ornament on the third day; and, through lack of cultivation, erupting flame, and the waters of the flood, it has long since been devastated.

[Page 192]

III. Man then possessed the image of God, צלם, or similitude, דמות; these two names do not differ in this matter, since they are interchanged with one another: Gen. 1:26–27, “let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness,” etc.; “and God created man in His image, in the image of God created He him”; Gen. 5:1, “in the likeness of God made He him”; Gen. 9:6, “for in the image of God made He man,” etc. The name “image” is also used of gifts: Rom. 8:29, ὅτι προέγνω, καὶ προώρισε συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ [whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son]; 2 Cor. 3:18, τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα μεταμορφούμεθα ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν [we are changed into the same image from glory to glory], etc. We maintain this against the Papists, who are accustomed to refer the image to nature and the similitude to gifts.

IV. This image is not to be sought in bodily lineaments, as some ancients beyond the Anthropomorphites wished, holding that God, in the act of creation, assumed the form of a body, or that He looked only to the incarnate Christ, since Christ in His incarnation is, on the contrary, said to have been made like men: Phil. 2:8.

V. Rather, this image first consists in the nature of the spiritual and immortal soul with its faculties, according to Scripture: Gen. 9:6, “whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God made He man”; James 3:9, τοὺς καθ᾽ ὁμοίωσιν Θεοῦ γεγονότας [which are made after the similitude of God]; Acts 17:28–29, “for we are also His offspring; forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone,” etc. There is also the actual similitude found here, since God is Spirit.

Objection 1. The gifts of wisdom and holiness—

[Page 193]

—constitute this image.

Reply: They do not alone constitute the whole image.

Objection 2. Those destitute of gifts are called unlike God.

Reply: With respect to qualities, not nature.

Objection 3. There is an infinite distance between the spirituality of God and of the soul.

Reply: Yet analogy remains here, just as in the gifts.

Objection 4. The spiritual mind is only the tablet upon which the image is painted.

Reply: It can be considered so with respect to the gifts, but not with respect to the whole image, since it can also rightly be compared with a statue.

VI. The chief part of this image is goodness, or rectitude, to which wisdom and holiness chiefly belong: Gen. 1:31, “and behold, it was very good”; Eccles. 7:29, “lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright”; 2 Cor. 3:18, “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory”; Col. 3:10, “putting on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him”; Eph. 4:24, καὶ ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν κατὰ Θεὸν κτισθέντα ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας [and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness].

In this last place, indeed, the restored man is treated, but with respect to that good which Adam lost. Therefore “righteousness” does not denote a right to eternal life, but must be understood of inherent righteousness, to which Paul also exhorts. There are also many indications of this rectitude in Adam in Moses; nor without this was he made for the glory of God.

VI. The Socinians deny this, and attribute puerile ignorance and innocence to created man. They object:

1. That he did not know his own nakedness.

Reply: Not with shame, compared with Gen. 2:25, “and they were both naked,” etc., “and were not—.

[Page 194]

—ashamed.”

Objection 2. That soon afterward he sinned at the first temptation.

Reply: This holiness was mutable.

Objection 3. That these habits are frequently acquired by acts.

Reply: These habits were infused into him by creation.

VII. Dominion over the other creatures also still belongs to this image: Gen. 1:26, 28, “and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,” etc.; “and have dominion over the fish of the sea,” etc.; Ps. 8:7, “Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands; Thou hast put all things under his feet,” etc., in which this is also demonstrated: Gen. 2:19–20, “and Jehovah God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam, to see what he would call them,” etc.; “and the man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field.”

Hence, since animals were open for food even before the fall, and man’s right was not increased by sin, the eating of flesh was lawful immediately.

Objection 1. Flesh was only afterward given for food: Gen. 9:2–3.

Reply: This right was then more explicitly renewed.

Objection 2. Herbs were first appointed for man’s food: Gen. 1:29–30.

Reply: There herbs are only distributed between men and beasts; one food does not exclude another.

Objection 3. The creatures were subjected to corruption through sin: Rom. 8:20–21.

Reply: The proper use of animals ought no more to be regarded as corruption than the use of herbs.

IX. As the Socinians wrongly place the image of God solely, or chiefly, in this dominion, so others wrongly exclude it altogether from this image, contrary to Moses’ text, and to the true likeness found here, and to other places: Ps. 82:6, “ye are gods, and—

[Page 195]

—children of the Most High, all of you”; 1 Cor. 11:7, “a man indeed ought not to cover his head,” εἰκὼν καὶ δόξα Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων [being the image and glory of God], etc.

Objection 1. Dominion is the end of the image.

Reply: It is only the end of the preceding parts of the image.

Objection 2. The image of God can stand without dominion.

Reply: Nevertheless, God by His will ordered it otherwise in the first man.

Objection 3. Dominion will cease in future glory.

Reply: By no means; only the end and present use of creatures will not there be repeated.

X. Finally, the image of God includes the immortality of the whole man, so long as he did not sin. This is proved both from those places which call death the wages of sin: Rom. 6:23; and derive it from sin: Rom. 5:12, 21, δι᾽ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος [by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin], etc.; ὥσπερ ἐβασίλευσεν ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ [as sin hath reigned unto death], etc.; and also from the threatening of death attached to sin: Gen. 2:17, “in the day that thou eatest thereof, dying thou shalt die,” etc.; Gen. 3:19, “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,” etc.

The Socinians deny this, saying that death is a consequence of nature; and they object:

1. Man was earthy: Gen. 3:19.

Reply: He could well have been preserved by God, nor could death have followed from this without sin.

2. Man used food and drink, which does not obtain in immortality: 1 Cor. 6:13.

Reply: Not in consummate and heavenly immortality.

3. Men would have begotten children, contrary to the state of immortality: Luke 20:35–36.

Reply: Again, that concerns consummate and heavenly immortality, when the human race will already have been fully multiplied.

XI. As the image of God is rightly attributed also to—

[Page 196]

—angels, so it belongs to woman together with man: Gen. 1:26–27, “and God created man in His own image,” etc.; “male and female created He them,” etc. When Paul says in 1 Cor. 11:7, “the man is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man,” he only attributes a greater degree of excellence to the man. It is also diffused through the whole man; nor can its ruins and relics be denied to fallen men, though not in all its parts.

XII. This image, even as to integrity and immortality, was natural to the first man—not as though it had been superadded by divine grace, like a bridle for restraining concupiscence, to man created in a state of pure nature, as the Papists wish. For man was created upright; and concupiscence needing to be restrained is sin: compare Rom. 7:7. Nor can a rational creature be imagined in a state of pure nature, in which it is neither good nor evil.

Objection 1. Man was also by nature earthy and mortal: Gen. 3:19.

Reply: Yet from that nature, without sin, death could not have flowed.

Objection 2. In the parable: Luke 10:30, natural things are not taken away.

Reply: Yet they are greatly diminished; and it is uncertain whether that part of the parable pertains to the state of the fall.

Objection 3. Man still today has his nature.

Reply: Yet not so perfect and glorious as was required in newly created man for the glory of God.

XIII. With man thus created, God further erected the Covenant of Works, which is elsewhere called the Covenant of Nature, the Legal Covenant, the Old Covenant, even the Sinaitic Covenant; but this covenant does not conveniently admit the notion of a testament in every respect.

[Page 197]

XIV. That a covenant was truly entered into with Adam is taught not only by the text: Hos. 6:7, “but they, like Adam, have transgressed the covenant”; but also by Moses, who recounts some of its parts: Gen. 2:17, “in the day that thou eatest thereof, dying thou shalt die”; and by Scripture everywhere, when it opposes another covenant prior to the Covenant of Grace: Rom. 3:27, διὰ ποίου νόμου; τῶν ἔργων; οὐχί, ἀλλὰ διὰ νόμου πίστεως [by what law? of works? nay, but by the law of faith]; Rom. 10:5, “Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law,” ὅτι ποιήσας αὐτὰ ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς [that the man which doeth those things shall live by them]; Gal. 4:24, αὗται γάρ εἰσιν αἱ δύο διαθῆκαι [for these are the two covenants], etc.

Objection 1. The majesty of God seems unworthy of such a pact.

Reply: A covenant with a sinner, which nevertheless He enters by His goodness, ought not seem less fitting.

Objection 2. Man was naturally obligated to obedience.

Reply: That obligation could be increased and more clearly demonstrated.

Objection 3. Adam was already enjoying blessedness in Paradise.

Reply: Not yet consummate and immutable blessedness.

XV. This covenant is defined as a gracious agreement between God and Adam, as the head of the human race naturally to descend from him, concerning heavenly blessedness to be conferred upon him on account of full, perpetual, and personal obedience to the natural and positive law, with the penalty of death added if man did not keep the prescribed condition.

XVI. This covenant is truly a διαθήκη [covenant] between God, as supreme, most good, and most just Lord, and Adam, furnished with habitual powers for performing the conditions of the covenant, and representing, together with Eve, all his natural posterity, according to 1 Cor. 15:22, 47, “as in Adam—

[Page 198]

—all die,” etc.; ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος [the first man], etc.; Rom. 5:12, 14, “as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all sinned,” etc.; “death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the type of Him that was to come,” etc.

This contains no injustice in itself, because Adam was the parent of all, furnished with sufficient gifts, and would also have merited good for his posterity. Christ, however, would by no means have been included, since He is opposed to Adam as the Head of another covenant; and He was pure from all sin and from personal guilt, since He came forth supernaturally, and not His Person but the assumed human nature was received from Adam.

XVII. The chief parts of the covenant are God’s stipulation and promise, and man’s accepting stipulation and reciprocal engagement. God stipulated obedience to the law:

1. Natural or moral, which was written upon Adam’s heart by the image of God.

2. Positive, concerning the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which was so named from the discrimination of goodness and evil; and from which man was severely forbidden to eat, so that in this small matter his obedience might be tested for the conviction of the whole world.

XVIII. This obedience had to be:

1. Perfect, as to the parts of the law and of man, as to its degrees, and as to its duration, until God should grant the inalienable reward.

2. Performed by the man himself, not by some surety: Lev. 18:5, “My statutes and My judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them,” etc. In this respect it especially differs from the—

[Page 199]

—Covenant of Grace. Hence, if Adam’s children had grown to maturity, it seems he would not have continued to represent them.

XIX. God promised eternal and heavenly life: Lev. 18:5; Matt. 19:16–17, τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; εἷς ἐστιν ἀγαθός [why callest thou Me good? there is none good but one], etc.; εἰ δὲ θέλεις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν ζωήν, τήρησον τὰς ἐντολάς [but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments]; Rom. 8:3, ἐν ᾧ ἠσθένει διὰ τῆς σαρκός [in that it was weak through the flesh], etc. This is also proved from His goodness, which admitted no lesser reward: compare Matt. 22:32, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” This promised good, however, would thus have been merited by Adam, not from condignity, but from a covenant most fitting to God.

XX. Therefore both the Socinians err, who remove every promise from Adam, and others, who wish that only the continuation of earthly life was promised to him.

Objection 1. A natural covenant does not admit a supernatural promise.

Reply: It is not called natural with respect to the promised reward, but with respect to its agreement with the dictate of nature.

Objection 2. There is no analogy here between labor and reward.

Reply: There is the best analogy, through God’s majesty and goodness.

Objection 3. No revelation of this life was made.

Reply: It was made in every way, inwardly and outwardly.

Objection 4. Adam already possessed this life.

Reply: By no means, except in beginnings and hope.

Objection 5. Christ is the first herald of life.

Reply: More properly, He is the only Author of life to fallen man.

XXI. The threatening added was of all death—temporal, spiritual, and eternal—if man should transgress. God also added sacraments confirming His covenant. Among these are numbered: first, by some, the weekly Sabbath;—

[Page 200]

—then Paradise representing heaven; then the tree of knowledge of good and evil, from which indeed it was not lawful to eat, but the sight of which, so long as man abstained, warned him that death would not harm him. Hence it is commonly called a sacrament of trial.

XXII. But the principal sacrament was the tree of life. Whether it was one in species, or also one in number, and what sort it was, is not sufficiently evident. It was so called altogether from the pledge of eternal life, not from any innate power of averting temporal death, which, after God’s sentence, neither can nor ought to be attributed to it, according to God’s ironical speech: Gen. 3:22, “behold, the man is become as one of Us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever.”

Of this tree man was to eat: Gen. 2:16–17, “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat,” etc.; Gen. 3:2–3, “of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it,” etc.; so that man might have represented to himself present and future communion with God, the fountain of life. But that Christ before the fall was signified by this tree, rather than the Father or the Spirit, seems to be asserted without proof.

XXIII. From the conditional promises of this covenant, it is clear that Adam did not have, by creation, a right to supernatural blessedness, so as to be only the adopted son of God, as some Papists wish. Furthermore, that man, by accepting the stipulation and by reciprocal engagement, accepted the condition and promise of the covenant is clear from the words of Adam and Eve: Gen. 3:2–3, 10, “of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat,” and “of the fruit of the tree which—

[Page 201]

—is in the midst of the garden God hath said,” etc.; “I heard Thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid,” etc.; and from man’s dependence and integrity. Thus also, with respect to the covenant, God became the God of Adam.

XXIV. This covenant was soon made old by sin; life was thereafter denied from it, and another covenant, the Covenant of Grace, was substituted. Yet there remains the natural obligation of the law, the condition of full obedience unto life, the connection of life with this obedience, and the connection of penalty with further transgression. Nor can this covenant ever again be erected with a sinner, because of man’s impotence and God’s vindicatory justice. Some today also enumerate five degrees of the antiquated Covenant of Works, perhaps with too little care.

NEXT