God is the Master and Creator of the Universe. He is the
Divine Head, the Lord of creation, and as Lord he self-discloses himself to man
“by way [mode] of covenant” (Westminster
Confession of Faith, VII.I).
God is distinct from and sovereign over all of creation.
This means that there is a permanent-and-ontological difference at back the relationship
between God and the creation. Thus, we can say that there are two ontological
realities in this world:
1) the eternal and infinite Triune-God.
2) the
temporal and finite creation.
What are the implications?
For starters, this means that creation is ontologically and metaphysically
dependent upon God. In John 1:3, God revealed that through the Word, Jesus
Christ, all things were created: “All things were made by him; and without him
was not any thing made that was made.” Therefore, Jesus Christ is the “source
of all activity and life” (Marcus Dods, The
Gospel of John, vol. 1, The
Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, reprint 1983), 684).
Since man is temporal and finite and distinct from the eternal
and infinite Triune-Creator, there must be some way that God relates-to and
relationships-with Creation. According to Scripture, God freely chose to reveal
and relate to creation by way of covenant, that is, covenantally (Genesis 2:17,
6:18, 9:11; Exodus 6:4, Deuteronomy 5:3, Psalm 25:14, 89:3; Luke 1:72; Romans
10:5-20, 11:27; Hebrews 12:24, 13:20). The milieu of God’s covenant with man is
God’s law. “The law of God expresses God’s holy nature to man (Greg Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, (Nacogdoches:
Covenant Media Press, 3rd ed.), 141). Therefore, God's law is the axiomatic system of the covenant.
God expresses his holy nature to all of creation; God
relates covenantally with all of creation, but since man was specifically created
in God’s image, and as such is a representative of God to the rest of creation,
this implies that man has a moral and an ethical obligation to obey the
stipulations of God’s law. Since man has this ethical obligation to keep the
law of God, there are conditions and promises tied to God’s covenant with man.
The covenantal conditions and promises are sanctioned by God’s authoritative
declaration: on the one hand, blessings and life will be rewarded for
covenantal faithfulness and obedience, while on the other hand, curses and
punishment unto death will be rewarded for covenantal unfaithfulness and
disobedience (see Deuteronomy 27-30).
We see in Scripture that God has made two
covenants with man: the first was a “covenant of works” made with Adam, the
first federal head of humanity; the second was a “covenant of grace” made with
Jesus Christ, the second Adam, the federal head of restored humanity.
Adam failed to keep the ethical
obligations of the “covenant of works” that God made with him, and as the
federal head of humanity sanctioned curses and judgment unto death for himself
as well as all of his descendants. Thus, ever since Adam’s fall mankind has
attempted to make himself the measure of all things: sinful man’s aim is to be
absolute, sinful man’s aim is to be autonomous. By this vain attempt, sinful
man attempts to usurp God the glory for which He alone is due. Because of sin,
the relationship (covenant) is broken that exits between man and the Divine. Secondarily,
it is also important to note that man’s relationship with the entire
created-universe is broken.
Cornelius Van Til noted, when God created
Adam and put him in the Garden of Eden, Adam was supposed to be “a prophet,
priest, and king under God in this created world” (Christian Apologetics, ed. William Edgar (Phillipsburg: P&R
Publishing, 2nd edition, 2003), 41). God intended for Adam to “interpret,” “dedicate,” and “rule” the world,
not for the sake of himself, but for God. That is, for God’s glory! Sinful man,
however, does not execute the offices of prophet, priest, and king for God’s
glory, rather he twists that ingrained-innate-calling as he attempts to be
absolute and autonomous.
Thus, sinful man is always trying to do prophetic, priestly, and kingly
things in this world, but he does them while in a broken relationship (covenant)
with God. So, what proceeds is this: false interpretation, perverted
dedication, and corrupted rule and judgment – these things are not of God but
are of man, thus, the prophetic, priestly, and kingly things that fallen men
accomplishes are after the “tradition of men” and “not after Christ.” (cf. Colossians 2:8: “Beware lest any man spoil you through
philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of
the world, and not after Christ.” Paul is saying you need to fashion knowledge
and belief after (the knowledge and belief in) Christ, that is, after the
Creator, not after knowledge and belief of the traditions purported by sinful
men and a fallen created-universe.)
However, God freely chose to make a
“covenant of grace” with Jesus Christ, the second Adam, the obedient prophet,
priest, and king. Jesus Christ was obedient, he had covenantal faithfulness
and entirely fulfilled the ethical obligations of God’s law as prophet, priest,
and king. Jesus Christ, therefore, faithfully interprets, dedicates, and rules the
world for the glory of God!
So, what we know about God by way of the
covenant is that God is not only the Lord who created the universe, but that he
is also the Lord who mercifully restores sinful men and renews creation. God
does that by adopting sinners through propitiation, that is, through the obedient
and atoning prophetic, priestly, and kingly work of Jesus Christ, with whom God
made a “covenant of grace” – wherein God “offers unto sinners life and
salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be
saved” (Westminster Confession of
Faith, VII.III).
"Let us cross over the river and rest under the shade of the trees." - T.J. "Stonewall" Jackson
Showing posts with label Covenant of Works/Creation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Covenant of Works/Creation. Show all posts
Friday, May 31, 2013
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Assignment: Covenant Summary
When my wife and I were in marriage counseling she made a comment in reference to one of the books our counselor assigned to us to read, and the gist of her comment was, "He [the book's author] keeps using the word covenant but he never defines it. I'm so confused." My wife was absolutely correct. And the deficit she noticed in that author is widespread; I've read mounds of books about the covenant but do so with the vaguest verbiage imaginable.
Yesterday I met with a friend from church and he asked me to define the covenant. I gave a somewhat long-winded answer: I started with the Creator-creation distinction and then moved on to describe the Covenant of Works with Adam and the Covenant of Grace with Jesus Christ. I was consciously trying to summarize the Westminster Confession of Faith's teaching on the covenant. We probably discussed that for 5-10 minutes, and at the conclusion my friend said, "So, how would you summarize that in two sentences?" That was my assignment for the day. So, I took a stab at it and this is what I've formulated, leaning heavily upon what I've picked up from WCF and in John Frame's writings.
Yesterday I met with a friend from church and he asked me to define the covenant. I gave a somewhat long-winded answer: I started with the Creator-creation distinction and then moved on to describe the Covenant of Works with Adam and the Covenant of Grace with Jesus Christ. I was consciously trying to summarize the Westminster Confession of Faith's teaching on the covenant. We probably discussed that for 5-10 minutes, and at the conclusion my friend said, "So, how would you summarize that in two sentences?" That was my assignment for the day. So, I took a stab at it and this is what I've formulated, leaning heavily upon what I've picked up from WCF and in John Frame's writings.
First, God is the Creator, He is the Divine Head, the Lord of all of creation, and as Lord he self-discloses himself to man "by way [mode] of covenant" (Westminster Confession of Faith).
Second, The two essential elements of a covenant are 1) conditions and 2) promises; God's relation as Creator to created man is by the way of conditions and promises, which means, on the one hand, that for obedience man is promised life and salvation, but, on the other hand, for disobedience man is promised death and damnation.What do you think? Clear as mud? Is that a helpful summary, or am I missing something?
Monday, June 20, 2011
Christ of the Covenants
O. Palmer Robertson introduces The Christ of the Covenants with two aims: To foster a correct understanding of the significance of God's covenants and the relation of the two testaments. He argues that the various covenants and the testaments are organically unified in Christ; they are unified by the "Immanuel principle"--a principle that "binds the whole of Scripture together" (51). Christ is the fulfillment of that principle; Jesus Christ is the Immanuel--God with us. Below is an extended quote from Robertson's book:
Classically, covenant theology has spoken of a “covenant of works” and a “covenant of grace.”
The term “covenant of works” has been applied to God’s relation to man prior to his fall into sin. This relationship has been characterized as a covenant of “works” in an effort to emphasize the testing period of Adam. If Adam should “work” properly, he would receive the blessings promised by God.
The phrase “covenant of grace” has been used to describe the relationship of God to his people subsequent to man’s fall into sin. Since man became incapable of works suitable for meriting salvation, this period has been understood as being controller primarily by the grace of God.
This division of God’s covenant dealings with men in terms of “covenant of works” and a “covenant of grace” has much to commend it. It emphasizes properly the absolute necessity of recognizing a pre-fall relationship between God and man which required perfect obedience as the meritorious ground of blessing. In this structure, Adam cannot be regarded purely as a mythical figure. In real history God bound himself to the man he had made to be “very good.”
This distinction also provides an overarching structure to unite the totality of God’s relation to man in his fallen state. Because of its inherent emphasis on the unity of God’ redemptive program, this structure delivers the church from the temptation to draw too strongly a dichotomy between old and new testaments.
However, the terminology traditionally associated with this scheme has significant limitations. No criticism may be offered with respect to the general structure of this distinction. Two basic epochs of God’s dealings with man must be recognized: pre-fall and post-fall. All the dealings of God with man since the fall must be seen as possessing a basic unity....The terms “covenant of creation” and “covenant of redemption” may serve much more appropriately as categorizations of God’s bond with man before and after the fall. The “covenant of creation” refers to the bond with God established with man by creation. The “covenant of redemption” encompasses the various administrations by which God has bound himself to man since the fall.
Classically, covenant theology has spoken of a “covenant of works” and a “covenant of grace.”
The term “covenant of works” has been applied to God’s relation to man prior to his fall into sin. This relationship has been characterized as a covenant of “works” in an effort to emphasize the testing period of Adam. If Adam should “work” properly, he would receive the blessings promised by God.
The phrase “covenant of grace” has been used to describe the relationship of God to his people subsequent to man’s fall into sin. Since man became incapable of works suitable for meriting salvation, this period has been understood as being controller primarily by the grace of God.
This division of God’s covenant dealings with men in terms of “covenant of works” and a “covenant of grace” has much to commend it. It emphasizes properly the absolute necessity of recognizing a pre-fall relationship between God and man which required perfect obedience as the meritorious ground of blessing. In this structure, Adam cannot be regarded purely as a mythical figure. In real history God bound himself to the man he had made to be “very good.”
This distinction also provides an overarching structure to unite the totality of God’s relation to man in his fallen state. Because of its inherent emphasis on the unity of God’ redemptive program, this structure delivers the church from the temptation to draw too strongly a dichotomy between old and new testaments.
However, the terminology traditionally associated with this scheme has significant limitations. No criticism may be offered with respect to the general structure of this distinction. Two basic epochs of God’s dealings with man must be recognized: pre-fall and post-fall. All the dealings of God with man since the fall must be seen as possessing a basic unity....The terms “covenant of creation” and “covenant of redemption” may serve much more appropriately as categorizations of God’s bond with man before and after the fall. The “covenant of creation” refers to the bond with God established with man by creation. The “covenant of redemption” encompasses the various administrations by which God has bound himself to man since the fall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)