Covenant of Works

[ReverendRV]

I would disagree with this. I believe scripture shows an immediate and continual ability of the original couple to eat from the Tree of Life from their creation onward. I would base this on the description of the Tree of Life in Revelation 22:2 which says, "...the Tree of Life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month..." This was continual fruit bearing year round - not just for a single season which Adam and Eve had to wait for fruit to appear . This indicates to me that the originally sinless couple possessed the continual ability to eat from the Tree of Life which was bearing twelve manner of fruits during every month of the year.

Their continual access to eating fruit from the Tree of Life was symbolic of the continual righteous state in which they were maintaining fellowship with their Creator - until they fell into disobedience. Only at this point did the fruit from that Tree of Life become forbidden to them and continual fellowship with their Creator was broken, resulting in their spiritual death.

Are you a Calvinist?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Are you a Calvinist?

For many decades…

 

[Mr GLee]

New forum member here.

I am writing on the Covenant of Works and distilled four conclusions about the C.O.W. from my reading. (Fesko/Abendroth/Grudem/Calvin and a some others.) I’m interested to see if my summaries are correct - or if in error, what is in error. One of the admins here saw my posts on another forum and thought I would get more feedback here.

Here is the first of the four conclusions. i appreciate your reviews, comments, observations and suggestions - it is important to me to understand and accurately represent the doctrine of the C.O.W.

Conclusion #1: Preconditions and Probation

“Adam had to, over a probationary period of time, perform “works” of righteousness by meeting the conditions of personal, perfect and perpetual obedience before God would allow Adam to eat from the tree of life.”

Sub Points:

1. Adam was given an undisclosed period of time (called “probation”) to prove whether he would demonstrate “personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience” to God – or disobey God and sin.

2. Only after the successful demonstration of these works of “personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience” during the time of his “probation,” would Adam have proven his perfect righteousness, earned eternal life, and be allowed to eat to the tree of life and thereby live forever.

is this correct?

Welcome to the mix.

I understand that a little differently. I would offer. No more probation to those born again from above.He promises He will never leave, never forsake.

Covenant of promise the reward of His "labor of love" or called a "work of His faith". . . giving new life to dying flesh with a living hope beyond the grave . all sons of God Christians die not the receiving the incorruptible..

We are informed in Philippians 1:6 if Christ our confidence has begun the good teaching work in us, he will continue to the last day under the Sun our last breath . Some are slower at learning than others myself included .sleeping in back of English class. I hated teachers you could say until I met Jesus.

The letter of the law. . . is God's instrument of judgement.. .death

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

You could say the probation period ended when mankind in the garden violated the letter of the law "death". Thou shall not or in dying you will come to a end and never rise to new spirit life .

The dust returns to the earth and the temporal (probationary) spirit given under the letter death returns to the Holy Father of all spirit life .

Born again believers we receives a new spirit born from above and a new heart that desire to do His will.recivubng the end of thier new born again faith from the beginning .

Our first love. God giving us ears to hear His spiritual unseen understanding. The gospel..hid from the lost.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

The fall. . . the breaking of probation period .

 

[Arial]

Thank you for your questioning the use of “probation.” I believe it is accurate, if those I cite are actually credible apologists.

Though I do not question the sincerity or abilities of the apologists you quote, according to my own view as a lay apologist (that is one who searches the scriptures continuously, and in a systematic way, to be able to know what I believe, why I believe it, support it, and articulate it to the best of my ability), I believe they have gone too far. By this I mean, they state things such as probationary period and its contents beyond what is actually given in the scriptures. And though Fresko is following the WC, either that too does the same thing, or he misunderstands what they intended. And what they intended was to in the say in the way of of catechism ---question and answer briefly stated for teaching purposes---portray the first condition of man and the fall that put all mankind in the hopeless condition we are now in and the need for a Savior.

I will go through the statements and present my objections and why in a seperate post. But to me it isolates one aspect of the COW from the whole covenant. It needs to be put together as a unit really and then discussed. But as you are asking about whether or not the authors you use are presenting the covenant correctly and I have not yet seen #3 and #4 and you have not yet given your rebuttal to the COW, I will respond to each assertion as given with my opinion as to its accuracy.

 

[Mr GLee]

I'll start with four passages. The first is 1 Peter 1:17-21 because verse 20 speaks of something that existed before the world was created, before Adam and Eve were created. Jesus was always going to come into creation and live, die, resurrect, and ascend. That is the context in which God's first blessing and commands (work) to Adam (and Eve) occurred. When God commands, "Be fruitful, multiply, subdue the earth and rule over it," He does so foreknowing Christ as the perfect sacrifice, a sacrifice that also defines the command.

I would offer..

1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;

We are not redeemed with corruptible, temporal things like the blood dying mankind.

The life of the flesh is in the blood but that life is spirit life not seen coming from God. Dust has no spirit life of its own.

Pagan tradition "out of sight out of mind" .No unseen God reigning in the hard hearts .

Blood as a metaphor like a lamb was the plan of God before he faithfully said "let there be " the testimony came 2000 years ago it remains good

In that way we walk by faith God's understanding .Yoked with him our burdens are lighter

1 Peter 1:19-20 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, the demonstration is over still having its efect in these last days

 

[Arial]

Question – WLC 20: What was the providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created?

Answer: The providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created, was the placing him in paradise, appointing him to dress it, giving him liberty to eat of the fruit of the earth; putting the creatures under his dominion; and ordaining marriage for his help; affording him communion with himself; instituting the sabbath; entering into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, of which the tree of life was a pledge; and forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.

This is isolated from all that follows in the WLC which is carefully laying out step by step all that comes after, and given by Fasko it own meaning separate from that and side tracks from it. As I will attempt to show.

“… Fourth, in the covenant of works God promised eternal life as the reward for perfect obedience…”

"When God formally administered the covenant, He placed Adam and Eve under a temporary probation. Once Adam and Eve fulfilled the mandate, were fruitful, multiplied, filled all the earth, and subdued it, they would have secured God’s promise of eternal life. It is, however, also possible that their probation could have had a shorter duration and, once passed, God would have allowed them to eat of the tree prior to the completion of the dominion mandate.”

I will quote from Gen 2 and 3 specific passages for the sake of space, but the entire two chapters must be considered and are in what I put forth. No where in either chapter does it say the above from Fasko. Here is what it says: Gen 2:9 And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden. and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

15-17 The Lord God took the man ad put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

In verses 18-25 we see other commands given to Adam concerning the dominion God was giving man over creation, a dominion which of course is subjected to the ultimate dominion of God over all His creation including man. Covenant of works. And the covenant of marriage for mankind was also instituted.

Those things I highlighted in red in his quote are never said in the scriptures but are utterly theorized and read into them. Life was promised, not eternal life. No probationary period was mentioned in the Scriptures. No promise was made by God that after a certain amount of undisclosed time was passed in obedience then He would give him eternal life. Or that if they passed the test He would then let them eat of the tree of life. So he is off to a bad start as far as I am concerned, though I do not know where he went from the quote you give.

(As an aside: Credentials do not mean truth. The late Norman Geisler had credentials as an apologist out the ying yang. And yet, though he said many things that are biblically sound, he also said many that were not. In fact he wrote and entire book, "Chosen But Free" that began with unsound theology as it started with man's position and worked up to God, with the freedom of man being sovereign over the freedom of God. The book did not bother with a speck of sound exegesis but was philosophically and theoretically and man based. Doctrine must first come from grounded and sound theology.)

To be continued.

 

[Arial]

Question – WLC 20: What was the providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created?

Answer: The providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created, was the placing him in paradise, appointing him to dress it, giving him liberty to eat of the fruit of the earth; putting the creatures under his dominion; and ordaining marriage for his help; affording him communion with himself; instituting the sabbath; entering into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, of which the tree of life was a pledge; and forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.

The question posed here is not "What is the covenant of works?" but "What is the providence of God towards man in the state he was created?" Everything following in the WLC is a systematic unfolding of the providence of God towards man in redemption.

 

[Arial]

“... When God, however, commanded Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge (Gen. 2:16-17), the threatened curse of death implies that life was the reward for perfect obedience. When God says, ‘For in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die,’ Adam would have lived had he obeyed the command. At some point he would have been permitted to eat from the tree of life. To eat from the tree of knowledge was to choose death. To obey God’s command was to choose life.”

It is not the tree of knowledge but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Yes life is implied for perfect obedience but there was no restriction given on eating of the tree of life. God said "Of every tree in the garden to may eat except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He did not forbid them from eating of the tree of life. They had life. The tree was the source of life and imo is a shadow of what is revealed in the NT about Jesus. (John 14:6; John 8:12; John 1:1-18)

“While Adam lived in the garden, he enjoyed life and possessed righteousness by virtue of being an image bearer of God, but the life he had was mutable and his righteousness was unproven. If Adam was obedient to the command and passed the covenantal probation, he would have entered a confirmed state of eternal life and his righteousness would have been proven.”

His righteousness at creation did not need to be proven. It existed. He would become unrighteous only if he violated any of God's commands. The one violation that would guarantee death was if he gained the knowledge of evil along with his knowledge of good. If he did not violate it one can presume that he and his posterity would live forever. But you see, he was created, corruptible but not corrupt, and mortal, able to die. The violation that gave him knowledge of evil corrupted him. And the corruption led to death. Which would also require that he no longer have access to the tree of life. And here is where the covenant of works must be interwoven with the covenant of grace---or eternal life through faith apart from works. They are both working together, in and through one another, in a beautiful and harmonious tapestry, with the consummation being mankind in Christ, being both incorruptible and immortal. Not in the same position he was in as created. Speculation into things that are not mentioned and naming them as the truth, and working outward from there, is bad apologetics.

Adam was not created with eternal life and he was not created incorruptible. The tree of life is not said to give eternal life, but is the tree from which life comes. He was never intended to have eternal life. An enemy had to be defeated once and for all and that, evidently, given what we are shown in the whole counsel of God, could only be done in the way in which it was done. Through all mankind becoming as their father Adam. And Christ becoming one of us and defeating that enemy sin and death by defeating the father of lies. And the new man, new creation in Him, becoming incorruptible and immortal. No more knowledge of evil for there is no evil.

 

[Arial]

NOTE: Fesko clearly states that access to the tree of life was restricted until Adam passed his probationary period of works by demonstrating those works of perfect, personal, and perpetual obedience to God.

He does clearly state this, but the Bible does not state any such thing. It says nothing in Gen 2 of God restricting the fruit of any tree but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Also there is no indication of any probationary period given in the Bible. What would speak against it is logic in addition to its not being said. One cannot prove their perpetual obedience unless they die at some point. And as long as they have access to the tree of knowledge of good and evil, someone would eventually eat of it. Then what? They go eat of the tree of life? Both trees are still there in that scenario. See the chaos in regards to a Savior saving?

So, Fesko is saying that according to the Covenant of Works, Adam had no permission from God to access the tree of life until his probation was successfully completed. Adam had to prove his righteousness through his “works” of perfect obedience before he was allowed by God to gain eternal life by eating from the tree of life.

Then I would have to say that he is not a reliable apologist on the covenant of works. He begins with unsupportable claims.

 

[Arial]

Christ’s Obedience for Us (Sometimes Called His “Active Obedience”). If Christ had only earned forgiveness of sins for us, then we would not merit heaven. Our guilt would have been removed, but we would simply be in the position of Adam and Eve before they had done anything good or bad and before they had passed a time of probation successfully. To be established in righteousness forever and to have their fellowship with God made sure forever, Adam and Eve had to obey God perfectly over a period of time. Then God would have looked on their faithful obedience with pleasure and delight, and they would have lived with him in fellowship forever. For this reason, Christ had to live a life of perfect obedience to God in order to earn righteousness for us. He had to obey the law for his whole life on our behalf so that the positive merits of his perfect obedience would be counted for us. Sometimes this is called Christ’s “active obedience,” while his suffering and dying for our sins is called his “passive obedience.”

Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, page 484, Copyright © 1994 by Wayne Grudem, Zondervan Publishing House.

As I have shown in my comments on Fesko this too repeats what is not given in the Bible. The idea of a probationary period. There is no indication in the scriptures that Adam was in a probationary period. He was created in a state of righteousness with no knowledge of evil. That righteousness ended when he disobeyed God. He became instead a sinner. A creature who knows good and evil, therefore is cut off from intimate life with God. It is completely unnecessary to read a probationary period into the scriptures.

I fully agree that Christ had to live a life of perfect righteousness to the covenant of works in both the Edenic covenant and the Mosaic in order to qualify as our substitute and give us His righteousness imputed. That is how He earned forgiveness for us so I do not understand the comment in red above. It seems utterly unnecessary and meaningless.

NOTE: Grudem repeats these two foundational Covenant of Works teachings of preconditions that restricted Adam’s access to the tree of life – the required “obey God pefectly,” and a time of probation where perfect acts of righteousness were required before receiving eternal life (“… lived with him in fellowship forever…”)

The apologists I cited use the word “probation“ or “time of testing” - the same thing.

Does that answer your concern about the use of the word “probation” and preconditions?

No it does not answer my concern about the use of the word probation. Which is different from preconditions which I never stated I had a concern with. Also the Bible does not state that Adam's access to the tree of life was restricted until after he broke the covenant.

 

[Guy Swenson]

As I have shown in my comments on Fesko this too repeats what is not given in the Bible. The idea of a probationary period. There is no indication in the scriptures that Adam was in a probationary period. He was created in a state of righteousness with no knowledge of evil. That righteousness ended when he disobeyed God. He became instead a sinner. A creature who knows good and evil, therefore is cut off from intimate life with God. It is completely unnecessary to read a probationary period into the scriptures.

I fully agree that Christ had to live a life of perfect righteousness to the covenant of works in both the Edenic covenant and the Mosaic in order to qualify as our substitute and give us His righteousness imputed. That is how He earned forgiveness for us so I do not understand the comment in red above. It seems utterly unnecessary and meaningless.

No it does not answer my concern about the use of the word probation. Which is different from preconditions which I never stated I had a concern with. Also the Bible does not state that Adam's access to the tree of life was restricted until after he broke the covenant.

Thank you. My intent is to accurately state conclusions of the C.O.W. from credible C.O.W. apologists. Who is credible is a fair question, one I am not qualified to answer, hence my posts here and other places as well.

Please allow me to ask some clarifying comments and questions:

1. Is personal, perfect and perpetual obedience the “works” required and referenced in the Covenant of ‘Works?”
2. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to live in perfect, personal and perpetual obedience in order to earn/merit eternal life?
3. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to perform works of righteousness for a period of time before he was granted access to the tree of life?
4. You state that the Bible shows there was no time of probation. I actually agree with that statement, but my question is not what you or I believe, but what is the correct and actual teaching of the C.O.W. Can you direct me to an authority you believe is credible that says there was no time of probation for Adam in the C.O.W.? (An authority other than the Bible … an expert in the C.O.W. doctrine … it seems to me that the idea of no probation wreaks havoc with the C.O.W.)
5. I will later reference the role of Jesus fulfilling the C.O.W. - is there a difference in what Jesus was expected to do vs what Adam was expected to do?
6. Does the WLC #20 I referenced EXCLUDE or INCLUDE a period of probation for Adam?

This type of interrogation of the premises I have stated is VERY helpful. I appreciate it.

 

[ReverendRV]

Thank you. My intent is to accurately state conclusions of the C.O.W. from credible C.O.W. apologists. Who is credible is a fair question, one I am not qualified to answer, hence my posts here and other places as well.

Please allow me to ask some clarifying comments and questions:

1. Is personal, perfect and perpetual obedience the “works” required and referenced in the Covenant of ‘Works?”
2. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to live in perfect, personal and perpetual obedience in order to earn/merit eternal life?
3. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to perform works of righteousness for a period of time before he was granted access to the tree of life?
4. You state that the Bible shows there was no time of probation. I actually agree with that statement, but my question is not what you or I believe, but what is the correct and actual teaching of the C.O.W. Can you direct me to an authority you believe is credible that says there was no time of probation for Adam in the C.O.W.? (An authority other than the Bible … an expert in the C.O.W. doctrine … it seems to me that the idea of no probation wreaks havoc with the C.O.W.)
5. I will later reference the role of Jesus fulfilling the C.O.W. - is there a difference in what Jesus was expected to do vs what Adam was expected to do?
6. Does the WLC #20 I referenced EXCLUDE or INCLUDE a period of probation for Adam?

This type of interrogation of the premises I have stated is VERY helpful. I appreciate it.

I think your four conclusions are good for the most part, as a foundation for the Covenant of Works. About Adam's Probation, it is probably similar to the Jews Probation in Deuteronomy 28; as I said earlier, the chapter is important to the Covenant of Works. The Jews Probation would've been their entire lifetimes; as you say, their Perfect, Personal and Perpetual Obedience. Could the lifespan have been the Probation period for Adam; as it was for Christ (It is Finished)?

But during Adam's lifetime, he would have Hungered and Thirst for Righteousness as Jesus did; he would have Hungered for the Fruit of the Tree of Life. He would have seen that the Fruit of the Tree was Good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining Eternal Life; then he would take some and eat. If his Probation was a Thousand Year Life, could he have taken Fruit from the Tree of Life; since it wasn't Prohibited?

 

[Arial]

1. Is personal, perfect and perpetual obedience the “works” required and referenced in the Covenant of ‘Works?”

Yes.

2. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to live in perfect, personal and perpetual obedience in order to earn/merit eternal life?

No. In order to not die and be forever separated from the source of life in a spiritual sense and in eternity. How would one measure perfect, personal and perpetual life if it did not end? And what of Adam's progeny, supposing He maintained this perfect obedience, and they remained in the garden with both trees still there? There is too much speculation in the COW as put forth by your sources, and the speculation leaves God's purpose in creation, just as it was, out of the equation.

3. Does the C.O.W. teach Adam had to perform works of righteousness for a period of time before he was granted access to the tree of life?

No.

4. You state that the Bible shows there was no time of probation. I actually agree with that statement, but my question is not what you or I believe, but what is the correct and actual teaching of the C.O.W. Can you direct me to an authority you believe is credible that says there was no time of probation for Adam in the C.O.W.?

Thank you. My intent is to accurately state conclusions of the C.O.W. from credible C.O.W. apologists. Who is credible is a fair question, one I am not qualified to answer, hence my posts here and other places as well.

You can't have it both ways. You are using "authorities" (a logical fallacy btw)upon which to base the COV. Here is something from Ligonier that describes the condition of Adam and the covenant of works. It does so by stating only the facts that are obvious by the Scripture content without adding something that is not there, is not necessary, and adds nothing to the doctrine, but does have the potential of confusion, losing sight of God's purpose and sovereignty, and contributing to even more speculation. Perhaps I am doubly down too much on this, but I am a stickler for the correct use of words and Bible accuracy.



"The covenant of works does not mean grace was wholly absent from the relationship the Lord had with Adam. God’s act of creation is itself gracious, for He was not required to create humanity. Also, that the covenant of works involves divine grace is seen in the creation of woman as the fitting helper for man (Gen. 2:18–25). Furthermore, the covenant of grace does not deny that good works are important or necessary. God only makes a covenant of grace with His people because Jesus — the second Adam — fulfills the covenant of works in our place (Rom. 5:12–21).

Adam’s state in the garden of Eden before his fall helps us understand the covenant of works. First, the Lord made Adam “good” when he was first created (Gen. 1:31), so at that point he was rightly related to God. Yet Adam’s original goodness does not mean that he was in the best relationship with God that he could be. Through obedience, Adam was able to reflect God’s image more deeply. Had Adam followed the command he was given — to refrain from eating the forbidden fruit (vv. 16–17) — he would have earned for himself and his progeny a positive record of righteousness in the eyes of God Almighty.

We also understand that Adam was good but changeable in his pre-fall state. He had the potential to break or keep the covenant of works. Since Christ’s obedience as the second Adam results in life for His people, we know that Adam would have earned eternal life in God’s presence if he had obeyed, sustained by the Tree of Life (Rom. 5:12–21). But Adam did not keep the covenant and thus forfeited the blessing of life, causing a curse to fall upon all creation.

It is important to remember today that mankind is still bound by the covenant of works. All people are still required to obey God perfectly. We are born under condemnation because fallen people cannot render such obedience (Rom. 1:21; 3:23)."

 

[Arial]

5. I will later reference the role of Jesus fulfilling the C.O.W. - is there a difference in what Jesus was expected to do vs what Adam was expected to do?

No.

6. Does the WLC #20 I referenced EXCLUDE or INCLUDE a period of probation for Adam?

Excludes. It does not mention it. It simply says perpetual. That means the second he disobeys God, he has broken the covenant and receives the consequences. It is not a set probationary period. Adam has access to the tree of life until he doesn't anymore.

 

[Arial]

This type of interrogation of the premises I have stated is VERY helpful. I appreciate it

I appreciate the challenge. It is one of my most productive ways of growth. Makes me think things through and be observant. A good training in critical thinking. Things jump out at me and then I have to figure out why. And then I have to find the biblical answer. And seriously contemplate things. It is a bit of a treasure hunt for me.

 

[ReverendRV]

I appreciate the challenge. It is one of my most productive ways of growth. Makes me think things through and be observant. A good training in critical thinking. Things jump out at me and then I have to figure out why. And then I have to find the biblical answer. And seriously contemplate things. It is a bit of a treasure hunt for me.

In my opinion, we needed a Non Calvinist who participates. I'm used to Posters ignoring me, and it makes me think their mouths have been closed. I hope he likes it here...

 

[Arial]

I think your four conclusions are good for the most part, as a foundation for the Covenant of Works. About Adam's Probation, it is probably similar to the Jews Probation in Deuteronomy 28; I said earlier the chapter is important to the Covenant of Works. The Jews Probation would've been their entire lifetimes; as you say, their Perfect, Personal and Perpetual Obedience. Could the lifespan have been the Probation period for Adam; as it was for Christ (It is Finished)?

I am still waiting on 3 and 4. Who keeps jumping ahead now?

 

[ReverendRV]

I am still waiting on 3 and 4. Who keeps jumping ahead now?

Earlier and elsewhere he said I can Post them, but I want him to go at his pace. If he is gone for a while, I'll do it...

 

[Arial]

Earlier and elsewhere he said I can Post them, but I want him to go at his pace. If he is gone for a while, I'll do it...

Is he going somewhere?

 

[ReverendRV]

Is he going somewhere?

I don't reckon, it's just the way some Posters are...