Covenant of Works

[Arial]

If I am understanding you to say that God’s covenants are unilateral instead of both parties agreeing, I think you are mistaken. God has a history of making covenants where both parties understand the terms and conditions of the covenant and agree. Ex. 24 is an explicit example of this.

I have gone through this before! There is more than one kind of covenant. Some are unilateral, some are bilateral. A covenant of works is bilateral, the covenant of grace is unilateral.

A covenant of works is a conditional covenant. This is compared to a covenant of grace, which has no conditions put on the covenant recipients, but only on God to perform His covenant promises. A conditional covenant was formed between God and Adam. God: You may if--- God: You may not or---. Covenant of grace. God: I will. Jesus: Believe in me and you will have eternal life.

God always institutes the covenant between Himself and mankind. He sets the conditions and the promises of the covenant. The participants agree to it. If they keep the covenant God does what He says He will do. If the break it, God does what He says He will do if they break the covenant. That is a covenant of works. Bilateral.


A unilateral covenant is seen in the Covenant of Grace. It is salvation by grace through faith. God institutes the covenant. He says I will do this for these people. He provides everything needed to bring them into the covenant and He alone is responsible for doing what He says He will do. The burden and requirement of the doing is on Him alone, nothing required of the participants for the promised eternal life.

 

[Eleanor]

Mankind is the crowning glory of His creation. Have you never read and understood "His glory is over all the earth."
His glory is expressed in everything He creates.

I agree, and we glorify his deity in submission and obedience. I do not see in Scripture where I am to "mirror" his image.

There is a little book called "More Than Meets the Eye" by Richard Swenson and Richard A. Swenson M.D. that will knock your socks off. I read it a long time ago but it still sticks with me. You can find it on Amazon.

Thanks. I'll get it.

P.S: Do have some background in life sciences.

 

[Guy Swenson]

nothing required of the participants for the promised eternal life.

Except belief …

 

[Eleanor]

Hi Eleanor!

Not sure what you are asking. My statement about what Fesko says is accurate, but I am not advocating that he is correct. Fesko would say the C.O.W. ended with the death of Jesus.

Help me understand what you are asking.

Thanks.

I wasn't asking anything, just making a reference to post #313 and Gal 3:10-12 there.

 

[Arial]

I agree, and we glorify his deity in submission and obedience. I do not see in Scripture where I am to "mirror" his image.

Thanks. I'll get it.

It will stun you, all the things we kind of know but when you see the inside workings of everything and realize the unfathomable power and perfection and knowledge and glory of God, it is breathtaking. Blessed and joyful reading!

 

[Eleanor]

I have gone through this before! There is more than one kind of covenant. Some are unilateral, some are bilateral. A covenant of works is bilateral, the covenant of grace is unilateral.
God always institutes the covenant between Himself and mankind. He sets the conditions and the promises of the covenant. The participants agree to it. If they keep the covenant God does what He says He will do. If the break it, God does what He says He will do if they break the covenant. That is a covenant of works. Bilateral.
A unilateral covenant is seen in the Covenant of Grace.

Likewise in the land grant (Ge 15:9-21).

It is salvation by grace through faith. God institutes the covenant. He says I will do this for these people. He provides everything needed to bring them into the covenant and He alone is responsible for doing what He says He will do. The burden and requirement of the doing is on Him alone, nothing required of the participants for the promised eternal life.

 

[Arial]

Except belief …

Which God gives. "By grace you are saved, through faith, and that is not of yourselves but is the gift of God. Like I said, in a unilateral covenant that God makes, He provides everything a person needs to be brought into the covenant. And that is the New Covenant.

 

[Arial]

Like wise in the land grant (Ge 15:9-21).

Yes, but that was a promise of the land to Abraham's descendants. The land grant covenant was the Mosaic covenant. That was the land grant document.

 

[Guy Swenson]

Which God gives.

A topic for another day!

 

[Eleanor]

Yes, but that was a promise of the land to Abraham's descendants. The land grant covenant was the Mosaic covenant. That was the land grant document.

Covenants are promises. The promise of the land and its boundaries were in the unilateral covenant of Ge 15:9-21, which covenant was cut in blood.

The fulfillment of complete possession of the land was under Joshua (Jos 23:14, 21:43), and fulfillment of complete occupation of the land was under Solomon (1 Kgs 4:21, 24-25; cf 2 Sa 8:3), both according to the boundaries of the unilateral covenant of the land grant in Ge 15.

What do you see referring to the land grant in the Mosaic/Sinaitic covenent (Ex 19-24)?

 

[ReverendRV]

Post #4 of 7

Now there are passages offered as “proof” of perfect obedience earning eternal life, such as their interpretation of the instruction to the nation of Israel to obey the laws of God. This theory takes events thousands of years after Adam, Eve and the Garden of Eden when God is speaking to Israel. Theologians say Lev.18:5 where God says to the Israelites: “You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the Lord” establishes a “works principle” of personal, perfect and perpetual obedience as the required means to earn eternal life. This “works principle” is said to convey the idea that the Adamic Covenant of Works was in full force during the time of the Israelites and that the Covenant of Works was directly referenced by God in Lev. 18:5.

Yes, but the Mosaic Covenant of Works was not in full force during the time of Adam. What you are doing is applying the Communicatio Idiomatum to the Covenants of Works; teaching that the Promises of the Mosaic Covenant are communicated to the Mosaic Covenant. An Anti Type, if you will...

I skipped ahead, because you were quouting Theologians regarding the Presbyterian Covenant of works...

 

[Guy Swenson]

Yes, but the Mosaic Covenant of Works was not in full force during the time of Adam. What you are doing is applying the Communicatio Idiomatum to the Covenants of Works; teaching that the Promises of the Mosaic Covenant are communicated to the Mosaic Covenant. An Anti Type, if you will...

I skipped ahead, because you were quouting Theologians regarding the Presbyterian Covenant of works...

More accurately, Fesko and Calvin are applying the Mosaic Covenant to Adam. Instead of foreshadowing (Moses lifting up the serpent .. Jesus being lifted up …) it is some odd form of ‘back shadowing,” for lack of a better term. What happened in the Mosaic Covenant proves/was applicable to the Adamic Covenant. That is in my Conclusion #2.

 

[ReverendRV]

Post #7 of 7:

As there was no precondition of “works” and no period of “probation” to do the “works,” and since the explicit Bible texts completely invalidate this two key premises, we could just stop here and say that the doctrine of the Covenant of Works contradicts clear and explicit Scripture in teachings essential to the doctrine.

However, there remain three more doctrinal conclusions that merit examination and the advocates of the Covenant of Works are unlikely to accept the direct refutation of probation and the preconditions of perfect obedience as being enough for them to deny such a closely held and revered doctrine.

As Sproul said of the Covenant of Works, “There is nothing less than our salvation at stake in this issue." If one’s entire understanding of salvation depends on the Covenant of Works being true, then probably more evidence is needed.

So, we move on to the next conclusion and see if a person could ever earn righteousness and incur a debt by God for eternal life, as the Covenant of Works teaches, or has righteousness before God always been a matter of belief in God and God’s grace?

They are all out there now!

I've read through the rest, all the way to the end of #7. I didn't have much to say, as Baptist Covenant Theology agrees with you. So much like when Provisionists argue against Calvinism, they're really arguing against Hyper Calvinism; your Conclusions are arguing against Presbyterian Covenant Theology, instead of Baptist Covenant Theology...

I may read more of the rebuttals to your four conclusions, but I presume they are not against the Baptist Covenant of Works. So far, what you have said doesn't Scratch it's surface...

 

[ReverendRV]

More accurately, Fesko and Calvin are applying the Mosaic Covenant to Adam. Instead of foreshadowing (Moses lifting up the serpent .. Jesus being lifted up …) it is some odd form of ‘back shadowing,” for lack of a better term. What happened in the Mosaic Covenant proves/was applicable to the Adamic Covenant. That is in my Conclusion #2.

I'll be looking forward to it, though I disagree the Mosaic Promises transfer to the Edenic Covenant; because of the different Federal Heads. The Covenants do not mix...

 

[Guy Swenson]

I've read through the rest, all the way to the end of #7. I didn't have much to say, as Baptist Covenant Theology agrees with you. So much like when Provisionists argue against Calvinism, they're really arguing against Hyper Calvinism; your Conclusions are arguing against Presbyterian Covenant Theology, instead of Baptist Covenant Theology...

I may read more of the rebuttals to your four conclusions, but I presume they are not against the Baptist Covenant of Works. So far, what you have said doesn't Scratch it's surface...

Now you are making more work for me ... Although, if Baptists agree, then that is good! It might not last when we get into the later conclusions. We will see …

 

[ReverendRV]

I'll be looking forward to it, though I disagree the Mosaic Promises transfer to the Edenic Covenant; because of the different Federal Heads. The Covenants do not mix...

Question; if they mix, why are All in Adam still Condemned?

 

[Guy Swenson]

Question; if they mix, why are All in Adam still Condemned?

You will have to ask Calvin or Fesko! Fesko may be easier to reach.

 

[makesends]

First, I recommend R. C. Sproul (rip) and Ligonierdotorg. Sproul was well and diversly read, prodigious in output, and fairly "down the middle" as a Calvinist. I also like him because he wasn't afraid of changing his views in new and better information was discovered and, perhaps more importantly, he was not a strict determinist.

At the risk of going of on a tangent, what is a strict determinist, as you mean it here? I believe absolutely everything after God is determined by God. But I don't mean that implies robothood, nor negates the operation of the will of the morally responsible individual creature. Do you mean by "strict determinist", the hyper-calvinist who claims humans have no choice?

 

[ReverendRV]

You will have to ask Calvin or Fesko! Fesko may be easier to reach.

It's a question to you...

Do you agree that in SOME sense, the Edenic Covenant of Works isn't mixed with the Mosaic Covenant of Works?

 

[Guy Swenson]

It's a question to you...

Do you agree that in some sense, the Edenic Covenant of Works isn't mixed with the Mosaic Covenant of Works?

Neither is a covenant of works. No such thing - a covenant of “works” - ever existed. Covenants - yes. Of Works? Never.