Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Over the years, it has been the considered view of some scholars that John Calvin regarded popular armed resistance to duly appointed but abusive civil rulers as illegitimate in the world of the 16th century and, by analogy, in the world of today. Instead, they are of the view that the legitimacy of forceful resistance to a tyrannical civil magistrate as subsequently developed by the later Huguenots, Scottish Covenanters and English Parliamentarians was rooted in the thought of Theodore Beza as it allegedly diverged from that of Calvin. They apparently base this view exclusively on a reading of the Institutes 4.20.24-30. This paper examines whether Calvin’s sermons on 2 Samuel, preached in 1562, puts to rest accusations of equivocation raised by the infamous “perhaps” of paragraph 31; and if so, whether they evidence a development in Calvin’s thought which stands in irreconcilable contradiction to the position expressed in the last chapter of the Institutes. Opsomming Johannes Calvyn, 2 Samuel 2:8-32 en weerstand teen die burgerlike owerheid: uiterste dubbelsinnigheid of beheersing van kontekstuele eksegese? Deur die jare was dit die oorwoë mening van kenners dat Johannes Calvyn gewapende weerstand teen die regmatige – hoewel onderdrukkende – owerheid as onwettig in die wêreld van die 16de eeu beskou het, en dat dit daarom ook onwettig vir vandag is. Daarenteen is hulle van mening dat die regmatigheid van gewelddadige weerstand teen die onderdrukkende owerheid, soos dit later deur die Hugenote, Skotse ‘Covenanters’ en Engelse Parlementariërs ontwikkel is, eerder in die denke van Theodore Beza gegrond was, na bewering in afwyking van Calvyn. Oënskynlik word hierdie mening uitsluitend gebaseer op ’n lesing van die Institusie 4.20.24-30. Hierdie artikel ondersoek of Calvyn se preke oor 2 Samuel, gehou in 1562, die aantyging van dubbelsinnigheid wat deur die berugte “miskien” van paragraaf 31 opgeroep word, kan weerlê. En indien wel, of hierdie preke ’n ontwikkeling in Calvyn se denke aantoon, wat in ’n onversoenbare teenstrydigheid staan met die posisie wat in die laaste hoofstuk van die Institusie ingeneem word.
Over the years, it has been the considered view of some scholars that John Calvin regarded popular armed resistance to duly appointed but abusive civil rulers as illegitimate in the world of the 16th century and, by analogy, in the world of today. Instead, they are of the view that the legitimacy of forceful resistance to a tyrannical civil magistrate as subsequently developed by the later Huguenots, Scottish Covenanters and English Parliamentarians was rooted in the thought of Theodore Beza as it allegedly diverged from that of Calvin. They apparently base this view exclusively on a reading of the Institutes 4.20.24-30. This paper examines whether Calvin’s sermons on 2 Samuel, preached in 1562, puts to rest accusations of equivocation raised by the infamous “perhaps” of paragraph 31; and if so, whether they evidence a development in Calvin’s thought which stands in irreconcilable contradiction to the position expressed in the last chapter of the Institutes. Opsomming Johannes Calvyn, 2 Samuel 2:8-32 en weerstand teen die burgerlike owerheid: uiterste dubbelsinnigheid of beheersing van kontekstuele eksegese? Deur die jare was dit die oorwoë mening van kenners dat Johannes Calvyn gewapende weerstand teen die regmatige – hoewel onderdrukkende – owerheid as onwettig in die wêreld van die 16de eeu beskou het, en dat dit daarom ook onwettig vir vandag is. Daarenteen is hulle van mening dat die regmatigheid van gewelddadige weerstand teen die onderdrukkende owerheid, soos dit later deur die Hugenote, Skotse ‘Covenanters’ en Engelse Parlementariërs ontwikkel is, eerder in die denke van Theodore Beza gegrond was, na bewering in afwyking van Calvyn. Oënskynlik word hierdie mening uitsluitend gebaseer op ’n lesing van die Institusie 4.20.24-30. Hierdie artikel ondersoek of Calvyn se preke oor 2 Samuel, gehou in 1562, die aantyging van dubbelsinnigheid wat deur die berugte “miskien” van paragraaf 31 opgeroep word, kan weerlê. En indien wel, of hierdie preke ’n ontwikkeling in Calvyn se denke aantoon, wat in ’n onversoenbare teenstrydigheid staan met die posisie wat in die laaste hoofstuk van die Institusie ingeneem word.
This study aims to offer a more profound comprehension of the origins, nature, and makeup, as well as the embodiment of humankind in relation to ontology, epistemology, and the axiom that encompasses us as humans within a philosophical and educational context. In this context, the paper explored the overall root, nature, and make-up, and the overall embodiment of humans within a philosophical framework and discussed how it is embodied in the teaching of the theology of knowledge. The paper also discussed the importance of a relational reflective style of knowing that is shaped by the faith stories of the Christians of old and the vision that those stories lead to in Christian religious education. The study concluded that the quest for understanding is not merely an academic exercise but a profound spiritual exploration. The philosophical underpinnings of human nature, as articulated by thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, Augustine and Calvin, underscore a dynamic interplay between rationality and divine revelation. There is a need for all to embrace the challenge of educating for virtuous action, grounded in a deep and abiding knowledge of oneself, one’s world, and the God who invites humanity into an ever-deepening relationship of love and understanding. Keywords: Human, Ontology, Education, Epistemology, Knowledge, Ministry, Philosophy, Christian, Experience.
The concept of Christ’s Priesthood has been the subject of comprehensive research work in recent times. Despite several attempts to investigate the doctrine of Christ’s Priesthood waves a theological enigma. Thus, the study delved into the concept of Christology as denoted in the Scripture. This scholarly analysis focused on the qualities, which are linked to atonement and mediation. Christian theology has various viewpoints, but the primary model connects the sacrifice of Christ to His role as intercessor. The ontological model was a theological framework that stresses Christ’s priesthood on His personality and activities. The sacramental priesthood model denotes a correlation between Christ’s sacrificial act and His intercession in a heavenly realm, with distinct aspects following a predetermined sequence. The functional priesthood model is based on classical Protestant theology which portrays that the sacrifice of Christ and mediation are intrinsically interconnected with His being. The study employed a biblical-theological approach that sought to address the prevailing debates concerning Christ’s Priesthood. Thus, the study injects relevant sources to formulate and build the Christological concept. The research paper opined a holistic understanding of the nature of Christ and His transformative power to redeem humanity through the unction of the Holy Spirit. It is crystal clear that Christ sacrificed Himself to atone for all humankind’s sins. More importantly, the paper contributes to the current exploration of Priestly Christology, thus fostering a deeper understanding of Christ’s Priesthood and its significance to contemporary biblical theological discussion. It also helps to lay bare the salvific value of ecclesiology. This paper is recommended for biblical-theological historical students to advance and improve their studies. Keywords: Priestly Christology, Biblical-Theological, Evaluation, Christ’s Priesthood
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.