Let's take Horton's quotation of Robertson on p. 96. Robertson follows the traditional line: "Law under Moses never was intended to function apart from promise. Separated from its promise-dimension, which reached its fulfilment in Christ, law never could provide a way for making sinners righteous." On this line of thinking we see that Israel is constituted a nation under God by grace. The law was added because of transgression, and to bind Israel into the true religion until Christ comes.

Now Horton responds. On p. 97 he approvingly quotes Kline: "the Sinaitic covenant as such ... 'made inheritance to be by law, not by promise -- not by faith, but by works.'" (The theology of Numbers alone refutes this, but let's keep to the matter at hand.) Horton argues the theocracy is a renewed law covenant, and so on and so forth.

However, who is the party to this law-covenant? It is the nation, the theocracy. What is promised? The inheritance. How was it obtained? By works. Now let us ask, On what basis were infants circumcised? On the basis that they belonged to the covenant-nation and had right to the inheritance? Which covenant gives them right to the inheritance? The covenant of works. It has all gone terribly wrong, I regret to say.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."