Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses by Johannes Piscator

Status
Not open for further replies.

Christusregnat

Puritan Board Professor
Howdy y'all,

I've completed my first translation project! Thank you Backwoods and Wayne for assisting with the proofing!

George Gillespie, a Scottish Delegate recommended Johannes Piscator's Appendix on Exodus 21-23 in glowing terms:

It will be asked, “But how does it appear that these or any other judicial laws of Moses do at all appertain to us, as rules to guide us in like cases?” I shall wish him who scruples this, to read Piscator’s appendix to his observations upon the 21-23 chapters of Exodus, where he excellently disputes this question, whether the Christian Magistrate is bound to observe the judicial laws of Moses, as well as the Jewish Magistrate was.
This Appendix has been separately translated by yours truly, and published here:


Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses by Johannes Piscator, Translated by Adam Jonathan Brink




This is the first in what I hope, God willing, will be a series of translations of Gillespie's source documents (to include Beza, Voetius and Junius, God willing).

I pray you enjoy this work, if you are able to purchase it.

Cheers,
 
Last edited:

sastark

Puritan Board Graduate
Adam, could you give a little biographical information about Piscator for those of us (like me) who are unfamiliar with him?
 

Christusregnat

Puritan Board Professor
From the preface:

My interest in Johannes Piscator (1546–1625) was piqued while reading George Gillespie’s treatise on the duties of the Christian magistrate, and his responsibility to observe the Mosaic Judicial Laws, Wholesome Severity.
In Wholesome Severity Gillespie (a Scottish Commissioner to the Westminster Assembly) discusses concepts which would show up in the Westminster Confession of Faith’s treatment of the the Law of God (Chapter XIX, especially paragraph IV), as well the Confession’s treatment of the Civil Magistrate (Chapter XXIII, especially paragraph III). In discussing whether the Judicial Laws of Moses pertain to Christian magistrates, Gillespie states that Piscator “excellently disputeth this question” in his Appendix to his observations on Exodus 21–23, which Appendix is translated below and retitled Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses for separate publication.
Piscator was a professor of theology and philosophy in various parts of Europe, including Strasburg, Heidelberg, Siegen and elsewhere. He prepared Latin commentaries on the whole of the Old and New Testaments, and prepared a German translation of the whole Bible. He also prepared many textbooks on theology, philosophy, and philology, including his Aphorisms of Christian Doctrine which was used widely. Piscator was an advocate of the supralapsarian position early in his life, only to become unsettled by a debate later in his life, and fall into the Arminian error. He is also noted for his opposition to the imputation of the active obedience of Christ in justification.
However, in his views of the Mosaic Judicial Laws, Piscator represents a consistent train of Reformed thought on the subject, including the early developments of Bucer and Beza, and the later clarifications by men like Franciscus Junius and Immanuel Tremellius, whom he cites as influences on his thinking. Piscator, in turn, would profoundly affect men like Rutherford, Gillespie and other Covenanters and Puritans, and through them, the Westminster Confession of Faith.
I hope that helps.

Cheers,
 

Peairtach

Puritan Board Doctor
Does Piscator add anything "new" to the theonomy debate e.g. new (stronger) arguments/perspectives?

Congratulations on translating this, from the Latin (?) I assume. Are you a scholar of ancient languages?
 

Christusregnat

Puritan Board Professor
Does Piscator add anything "new" to the theonomy debate e.g. new (stronger) arguments/perspectives?

Congratulations on translating this, from the Latin (?) I assume. Are you a scholar of ancient languages?
Richard,

Piscator lends color to what Gillespie, and those convinced by his arguments would have meant by the "General Equity" of the Mosaic Judicials, and from that perspective, I think he lends light to the original intention of the Westminster Assembly. From that perspective I think his work is valuable in establishing the "context" for the WCF's teaching on the Judicials.

Piscator's arguments, although not identical, very closely resemble those of Greg Bahnsen, for example. However, feel free to read, and offer your own input on the matter.

Indeed, it was translated out of Latin. Scholar is a rather strong term to use for my skill level.

Cheers,
 

Christusregnat

Puritan Board Professor
Anyone else interested in what a book said that influenced the Westminster Assembly in some way had to say about the judicial laws of Moses?

:bueller:
 

Scott

Puritan Board Graduate
Did Piscator or others deal with the detailed application of Mosaic Law? Bahnsen mostly defended the idea of using the Mosaic Law, but the details were usually not addressed.
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
Reminder. If you want to discuss Piscator's views of the Mosaic law that is fine, but if you want to discuss Piscator in relation to Theonomy do so in the Theonomy sub forum. :judge:
 

Scott

Puritan Board Graduate
Great, that is fine. I am not interested in talking about Theonomy. I am curious about an analysis of the details of the judicial Law.
 

Backwoods Presbyterian

Puritanboard Amanuensis
How exactly do the Mods define "Theonomy"? There seems to be very little wiggle room in this regard. You mention the word "judicial" all of a sudden threads need locked away with the key thrown away.
 

Christusregnat

Puritan Board Professor
Great, that is fine. I am not interested in talking about Theonomy. I am curious about an analysis of the details of the judicial Law.


Scott,

Piscator gives illustrations of the application of the judicial laws.

They are not extensive, but they are helpful.

Cheers,
 

py3ak

They're stalling and plotting against me
Staff member
How exactly do the Mods define "Theonomy"? There seems to be very little wiggle room in this regard. You mention the word "judicial" all of a sudden threads need locked away with the key thrown away.
That sounds like a post for the "theonomy" forum! Would you like to start a thread?
 

tcalbrecht

Puritan Board Junior
How exactly do the Mods define "Theonomy"? There seems to be very little wiggle room in this regard. You mention the word "judicial" all of a sudden threads need locked away with the key thrown away.
"That since the term 'theonomy' in its simplest definition means 'God's Law', the General Assembly affirms the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 19, and Larger Catechism, Question 93-150, as a broad but adequate definition of theonomy." Minutes 7th General Assembly of the PCA, 1979, 7-49, III, 22, p. 115
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
The moderators will determine when to move threads regardless of definitions of words in other contexts Tom.
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
We do what we can Tom. The EP forum is moderated and we move things to that when the subject comes up and folks understand why given the history of discussions on PB. The same thing with Theonomy. It has to do with contentions and contentiousness as it has played out on this board on these subjects.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top