Does Pink's book uncover all the attributes of God?

[InSlaveryToChrist]

Does Pink's book, "The Attributes of God," uncover all the attributes of God? Is not righteousness (or justice), for example, an attribute of God? Pink does mention the wrath of God, but that sounds more like a covenantal than an essential attribute of God (if I may use that distinction).

Also, if Pink used Stephen Charnock's book, "The Existence and Attributes of God" as a source material for his own book, why does he not mention as many attributes in his own book as in Charnock's? Did Pink disagree on something?

Lastly, what resources would you recommend for a person who wants to study all the attributes of God revealed in the Scriptures (not merely deduced by human reason)?

 

[JM]

I haven't read Pink's work on the subject so I'm subscribing to find out as well. Charnock's work is wonderful and wonderfully full of devotional quality material.

 

[py3ak]

Isn't that like asking why Pink's work on Hebrews isn't as long as that of Owen? Pink had a purpose, style, and audience of his own.
I am partial to George Swinnock's treatise on the Incomparableness of God, but I suspect that if you go through Charnock there will be little absolutely new for you to learn.
Incidentally, if an attribute is contained in the Scripture by good and necessary consequence of the statements of Scripture it is revealed in Scripture, even if the term for it never appears.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

Isn't that like asking why Pink's work on Hebrews isn't as long as that of Owen? Pink had a purpose, style, and audience of his own.

I don't think the length of one's text is the issue here, but the points that are conveyed through the text. I think Pink would disagree on very few points with Owen in his work on Hebrews, since he likes to quote him continuously. I totally understand if Pink preferred to use his own terms (for his own purposes) to describe the attributes of God, but it seems he didn't agree with Charnock on multiple crucial points in that he intentionally left out omnipresence and wisdom as two of God's attributes. In his book, Pink does not attribute those things to God in any notable way. I don't see why Pink would skip such essential things. Appealing to one's own purpose, style or audience would be a bad excuse here, In my humble opinion.

In any case, I personally think that Pink's list of attributes is insufficient. He does do a great job presenting the attributes he listed though, no kidding about that!

I am partial to George Swinnock's treatise on the Incomparableness of God, but I suspect that if you go through Charnock there will be little absolutely new for you to learn.
Incidentally, if an attribute is contained in the Scripture by good and necessary consequence of the statements of Scripture it is revealed in Scripture, even if the term for it never appears.

I totally agree with the bolded phrase. What I meant by, "merely deduced by human reason," was an attribute is given to God that is not deducable from Scripture.

Now that that's clear, I think I'll ask my question once more:

What resources would you recommend for a person who wants to study all the attributes of God revealed in the Scriptures (not merely deduced by human reason)?

 

[Prufrock]

on multiple crucial points in that he intentionally left out omnipresence and wisdom as two of God's attributes. In his book, Pink does not attribute those things to God in any notable way. I don't see why Pink would skip such essential things. Appealing to one's own purpose, style or audience would be a bad excuse here, In my humble opinion.

"In this booklet an effort has been made to set forth some of the principal perfections of the Divine character" (from the Preface to the book). Ruben wasn't offering an excuse, as though Pink needed one. He never claimed to be writing an exhaustive treatise on the nature and attributes of God, but rather a small, devotional booklet to aid people in the meditation on a few of the principal perfections of God. I'm sure you wouldn't say Matthew disagreed with Luke because he didn't include the parable of the good Samaritan in his gospel.

More in answer to your question, keep in mind there is not some "official list" of "all the attributes" of God out there. Different teachers will make different decisions in how they present their material on the divine nature and character. In that light, any of the classic treatments (such as Charnock, which you have mentioned) serve that purpose sufficiently, even if they superficially differ from their brethren.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

on multiple crucial points in that he intentionally left out omnipresence and wisdom as two of God's attributes. In his book, Pink does not attribute those things to God in any notable way. I don't see why Pink would skip such essential things. Appealing to one's own purpose, style or audience would be a bad excuse here, In my humble opinion.

"In this booklet an effort has been made to set forth some of the principal perfections of the Divine character" (from the Preface to the book). Ruben wasn't offering an excuse, as though Pink needed one. He never claimed to be writing an exhaustive treatise on the nature and attributes of God, but rather a small, devotional booklet to aid people in the meditation on a few of the principle perfections of God. I'm sure you wouldn't say Matthew disagreed with Luke because he didn't include the parable of the good Samaritan in his gospel.

More in answer to your question, keep in mind there is not some "official list" of "all the attributes" of God out there. Different teachers will make different decisions in how they present their material on the divine nature and character. In that light, any of the classic treatments (such as Charnock, which you have mentioned) serve that purpose sufficiently, even if they superficially differ from their brethren.

I cannot believe I didn't remember that note from the Preface! Just yesterday I read it twice. Well, my bad.

Realizing how important it is that we get God's attributes right, while also realizing there is no "official" list of God's attributes, how should we proceed in our study of them? One of the main issues here is definitely the classification of God's attributes. So, how should we classify God's attributes? The Reformed theology has historically distinguished between “Incommunicable” and “Communicable” attributes of God. But there is criticism concerning this approach. Donald Macleod notes that,

None of these [classifications] has much to commend it and certainly none is to be regarded as authoritative. Scripture nowhere attempts a classification… All the suggested classifications are artificial and misleading, not least that which has been most favoured by Reformed theologians - the division into communicable and incommunicable attributes. The problem here is that these qualities we refer to as incommunicable adhere unalterably to those we refer to as communicable. For example, God is “infinite, eternal and unchangeable” (The Shorter Catechism, Answer 4) and these are deemed to be incommunicable properties: and God is merciful, which is deemed to be a communicable property. But the mercy itself is “infinite, eternal and unchangeable” and as such is incommunicable. The same is true of all the other so-called communicable attributes such as the love, righteousness and faithfulness of God. One the other hand, to speak of omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence as incommunicable is equally unsatisfactory. If we remove the prefix omni we are left simply with power, knowledge and presence, all of which have analogies in our own human existence. (Behold Your God, p. 20–21)

However, Louis Berkhof justified his use of these categories, saying that,

if we… remember that none of the attributes of God are incommunicable in the sense that there is no trace of them in man, and none of them are communicable in the sense that they are found in man as they are found in God, we see no reason why we should depart from the old division which has become so familiar in Reformed theology. (Systematic Theology, p. 55–56).

I've also heard one of our PB members suggest another kind of classification:

"The distinction here is between God's essential attributes, and God's covenantal attributes. God is essentially immutable, simple, etc. because that is how God would be no matter the circumstances. God cannot be anything other than his essential attributes. God is covenantally wrathful against sin because God freely chooses to create the world and respond to sin in wrath. I think the essential/covenantal attributes distinction makes a lot more sense than the more popular communicable/incommunicable attributes scheme. Thus, God's essential attributes are those things he is in and of himself. His covenantal attributes are those things that God is in his condescension to creation."

What are your thoughts?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Barth’s (Christian Dogmatics II, part I) outline of how the attributes may be classified is often used by theologians. According to Barth, the attributes of God may be classified using one of the following six different classification methods:

(1) positive and negative
(2) communicable and incommunicable (what God is and of Himself)
(3) quiescent and active
(4) relative (to creation) and absolute
(5) transitive and intransitive
(6) metaphysical and moral

Readers of theology will note that many theologians use method (2). No matter what methods are used, one could argue that all of God’s attributes fall into the classes of great and good. What derives from this is might be, with a tip of the hat to Robert Culver's Systematic Theology, a gathering of the attributes of God according to five affirmations from Scripture:

(1) ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24)
- personality (Genesis 3:9-23; Genesis 18:17; Exodus 3:3-6; Exodus 19:9-19)
- self-consciousness (Exodus 3:14; 1 Corinthians 2:9, 10)
- self-determination (Isaiah 40-66; Ephesians 1:5, 9, 11; Deuteronomy 29:29)
- life (Deuteronomy 5:26; Jeremiah 10:10, 11; 1 Thessalonians 1:9)
- activity (Psalms 84:1-2; Ecclesiastes 12:14; Mark 9:41)
- intelligence (Psalms 104:24; 1 Samuel 1:3; Isaiah 11:2; Job 38-41)

(2) ‘the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath, there is no other’ (Deuteronomy 4:39)
- Biblical doctrines of monotheism (Deuteronomy 4:35; Deuteronomy 6:4-5; Isaiah 44:6-7; James 2:19)

(3) ‘our God is greater than all gods’ (2 Chronicles 2:5)
- self-existence (Exodus 3:14; John 5:26; Jeremiah 2:13; Psalms 36:9)
- eternity (Psalms 90:2; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:17)
- immensity (1 Kings 8:27; Romans 8:38, 39)
- omnipresence (Psalms 139:7-10; Jeremiah 23:23-24)
- omniscience (Hebrews 4:13; 2 Chronicles 16:9; Isaiah 46:9-11)
- omnipotence (Matthew 19:26; Genesis 17:1; Jeremiah 32:17; Isaiah 40:28; Ephesians 1:11; Revelations 19:6)
- incomprehensibility (Psalms 36:5-6; Romans 11:33, cf. 34-35; Job 11:7)
- absoluteness (1 Timothy 6:15; Romans 1:25)
- infinity (Ephesians 1:23; Jeremiah 23:23-24; Psalms 139:7-12; Psalms 147:5; Job 11:7-9)
- transcendence and immanence (Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 139:7-10; John 8:23)
- time and space, time-space (Psalms 90:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Romans 8:39; 1 Kings 8:27)

(4) ‘Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good’ (Psalms 107:1)
- holiness (Psalms 99:9; Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 105:42; Psalms 89:35)
- righteousness (Psalms 11:7; Titus 1:2; 2 Timothy 2:13; Psalms 89:14; Psalms 119:137; Romans 3:21; Revelations 16:4-7)
- truth (John 17:3; Jeremiah 33:6; 2 Samuel 2:6; Exodus 34:6; John 1:17; Romans 3:4)
- faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:9-11; Deuteronomy 32:4; Jeremiah 16:19; Psalms 89:18; Psalms 19:7; Deuteronomy 6:26)
- love (1 John 4:19; 1 John 4:12; John 4:8)
- mercy (Psalms 145:15-16; Psalms 106:1; Psalms 136:11; Acts 14:17)

(5) ‘the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19)
- one simple essence/substance, three modes of subsistence (not modes as in the sense used by Unitarianism), which are often called “persons”, which do not divide the essence of God. Instead God’s essence is common to the three Persons in God, not communicated from one to another; they each of them partake of the essence, and possess it as one undivided nature—‘as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ’, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father. One God who eternally exists in three different persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal. (Romans 16:26; Revelations 1:17; Matthew 28:20; Acts 17:28-29; John 14-16)

AMR

---------- Post added at 02:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:16 PM ----------

"The distinction here is between God's essential attributes, and God's covenantal attributes. God is essentially immutable, simple, etc. because that is how God would be no matter the circumstances. God cannot be anything other than his essential attributes. God is covenantally wrathful against sin because God freely chooses to create the world and respond to sin in wrath. I think the essential/covenantal attributes distinction makes a lot more sense than the more popular communicable/incommunicable attributes scheme. Thus, God's essential attributes are those things he is in and of himself. His covenantal attributes are those things that God is in his condescension to creation."

I worry about statements that may accidentally lead folks to elevating one of God's attributes above the other. God’s attributes are not parts composing the Divine Essence. The whole essence is in each attribute, and the attribute in the essence. We should not conceive of the divine essence as existing by itself, and prior to the attributes. God is not essence and attributes, but in attributes. Indeed, knowledge of the attributes carries with it knowledge of the essence.

AMR

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

Barth’s (Christian Dogmatics II, part I) outline of how the attributes may be classified is often used by theologians. According to Barth, the attributes of God may be classified using one of the following six different classification methods:

(1) positive and negative
(2) communicable and incommunicable (what God is and of Himself)
(3) quiescent and active
(4) relative (to creation) and absolute
(5) transitive and intransitive
(6) metaphysical and moral

Readers of theology will note that many theologians use method (2). No matter what methods are used, one could argue that all of God’s attributes fall into the classes of great and good. What derives from this is might be, with a tip of the hat to Robert Culver's Systematic Theology, a gathering of the attributes of God according to five affirmations from Scripture:

(1) ‘God is spirit’ (John 4:24)
- personality (Genesis 3:9-23; Genesis 18:17; Exodus 3:3-6; Exodus 19:9-19)
- self-consciousness (Exodus 3:14; 1 Corinthians 2:9, 10)
- self-determination (Isaiah 40-66; Ephesians 1:5, 9, 11; Deuteronomy 29:29)
- life (Deuteronomy 5:26; Jeremiah 10:10, 11; 1 Thessalonians 1:9)
- activity (Psalms 84:1-2; Ecclesiastes 12:14; Mark 9:41)
- intelligence (Psalms 104:24; 1 Samuel 1:3; Isaiah 11:2; Job 38-41)

(2) ‘the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath, there is no other’ (Deuteronomy 4:39)
- Biblical doctrines of monotheism (Deuteronomy 4:35; Deuteronomy 6:4-5; Isaiah 44:6-7; James 2:19)

(3) ‘our God is greater than all gods’ (2 Chronicles 2:5)
- self-existence (Exodus 3:14; John 5:26; Jeremiah 2:13; Psalms 36:9)
- eternity (Psalms 90:2; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:17)
- immensity (1 Kings 8:27; Romans 8:38, 39)
- omnipresence (Psalms 139:7-10; Jeremiah 23:23-24)
- omniscience (Hebrews 4:13; 2 Chronicles 16:9; Isaiah 46:9-11)
- omnipotence (Matthew 19:26; Genesis 17:1; Jeremiah 32:17; Isaiah 40:28; Ephesians 1:11; Revelations 19:6)
- incomprehensibility (Psalms 36:5-6; Romans 11:33, cf. 34-35; Job 11:7)
- absoluteness (1 Timothy 6:15; Romans 1:25)
- infinity (Ephesians 1:23; Jeremiah 23:23-24; Psalms 139:7-12; Psalms 147:5; Job 11:7-9)
- transcendence and immanence (Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 139:7-10; John 8:23)
- time and space, time-space (Psalms 90:1-2; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Romans 8:39; 1 Kings 8:27)

(4) ‘Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good’ (Psalms 107:1)
- holiness (Psalms 99:9; Psalms 51:11; Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 105:42; Psalms 89:35)
- righteousness (Psalms 11:7; Titus 1:2; 2 Timothy 2:13; Psalms 89:14; Psalms 119:137; Romans 3:21; Revelations 16:4-7)
- truth (John 17:3; Jeremiah 33:6; 2 Samuel 2:6; Exodus 34:6; John 1:17; Romans 3:4)
- faithfulness (Deuteronomy 7:9-11; Deuteronomy 32:4; Jeremiah 16:19; Psalms 89:18; Psalms 19:7; Deuteronomy 6:26)
- love (1 John 4:19; 1 John 4:12; John 4:8)
- mercy (Psalms 145:15-16; Psalms 106:1; Psalms 136:11; Acts 14:17)

(5) ‘the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19)
- one simple essence/substance, three modes of subsistence (not modes as in the sense used by Unitarianism), which are often called “persons”, which do not divide the essence of God. Instead God’s essence is common to the three Persons in God, not communicated from one to another; they each of them partake of the essence, and possess it as one undivided nature—‘as all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ’, so in the Holy Spirit; and of the Father. One God who eternally exists in three different persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal. (Romans 16:26; Revelations 1:17; Matthew 28:20; Acts 17:28-29; John 14-16)

AMR

---------- Post added at 02:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:16 PM ----------

"The distinction here is between God's essential attributes, and God's covenantal attributes. God is essentially immutable, simple, etc. because that is how God would be no matter the circumstances. God cannot be anything other than his essential attributes. God is covenantally wrathful against sin because God freely chooses to create the world and respond to sin in wrath. I think the essential/covenantal attributes distinction makes a lot more sense than the more popular communicable/incommunicable attributes scheme. Thus, God's essential attributes are those things he is in and of himself. His covenantal attributes are those things that God is in his condescension to creation."

I worry about statements that may accidentally lead folks to elevating one of God's attributes above the other. God’s attributes are not parts composing the Divine Essence. The whole essence is in each attribute, and the attribute in the essence. We should not conceive of the divine essence as existing by itself, and prior to the attributes. God is not essence and attributes, but in attributes. Indeed, knowledge of the attributes carries with it knowledge of the essence.

AMR

Thanks, Patrick! That's some good food for thought!

I would still like to ask for a recommendation of resources for studying as many attributes of God as possible. Please, help me here (anyone).

 

[LeeD]

This might not be anything you are looking for, but it is a study guide approach to learning more about God's attributes.

http://resources.grantedministries.org/ebook/WASHER_OTG_ED3_WEB.pdf

One True God, Paul Washer

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

This might not be anything you are looking for, but it is a study guide approach to learning more about God's attributes.

http://resources.grantedministries.org/ebook/WASHER_OTG_ED3_WEB.pdf

One True God, Paul Washer

I've actually read that little book from Paul Washer. It was good and solid in its teachings about God. However, I'm looking for a more exhaustive list of God's attributes. Thanks for your help, anyways!

 

[toddpedlar]

This might not be anything you are looking for, but it is a study guide approach to learning more about God's attributes.

http://resources.grantedministries.org/ebook/WASHER_OTG_ED3_WEB.pdf

One True God, Paul Washer

I've actually read that little book from Paul Washer. It was good and solid in its teachings about God. However, I'm looking for a more exhaustive list of God's attributes. Thanks for your help, anyways!

You certainly are persistent, Samuel. I would suggest that first, you digest completely Charnock's work and Pink's work - and after having taken notes on the whole and compared them with Scripture, see if you think there is anything lacking. You seem to be implying that the combination of Charnock and Pink is necessarily lacking somehow. What reasons do you have to suspect that there are big holes in their writing on the subject? I will confess to being confused as to the nature of your question.

If you want another work that is complementary to the two already mentioned, you will want to check out Bavinck's volume 2 - it's got a very extensive discussion of the doctrine of God.

If those aren't sufficient for you, then I'm not sure you're going to find what you are looking for. The three of these (Pink, Charnock, Bavinck) make a very good trio of works on the subject. Perhaps you also want to look at Owen's volumes on the Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Trinity.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

This might not be anything you are looking for, but it is a study guide approach to learning more about God's attributes.

http://resources.grantedministries.org/ebook/WASHER_OTG_ED3_WEB.pdf

One True God, Paul Washer

I've actually read that little book from Paul Washer. It was good and solid in its teachings about God. However, I'm looking for a more exhaustive list of God's attributes. Thanks for your help, anyways!

You certainly are persistent, Samuel. I would suggest that first, you digest completely Charnock's work and Pink's work - and after having taken notes on the whole and compared them with Scripture, see if you think there is anything lacking. You seem to be implying that the combination of Charnock and Pink is necessarily lacking somehow. What reasons do you have to suspect that there are big holes in their writing on the subject? I will confess to being confused as to the nature of your question.

If you want another work that is complementary to the two already mentioned, you will want to check out Bavinck's volume 2 - it's got a very extensive discussion of the doctrine of God.

If those aren't sufficient for you, then I'm not sure you're going to find what you are looking for. The three of these (Pink, Charnock, Bavinck) make a very good trio of works on the subject. Perhaps you also want to look at Owen's volumes on the Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Trinity.

I think I never said that Charnock's work is insufficient in its list of attributes. I did say that about Pink's work. Thank you for the recommendations, they seem to make a very good combination on the subject in question.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

However, I'm looking for a more exhaustive list of God's attributes. Thanks for your help, anyways!

God is unmeasurable so we will never be able to exhaust any such list. Might be best to stick with what God saw fit to declare as he past by Moses: "The LORD, the LORD..."

The over 600 names and descriptors of God in Scripture each reveal aspects of God, so you might consider that approach if you want to create a list.

The creatures in God's presence about throne also seem to have it down, as well: "Holy, holy, holy..."

AMR