I have not read Horton's book. I can only go from what I have heard.

I don't think he would see his position (which relies much on Meredith Kline's researches) as coming apart from the historic CT position, but rather building upon it. However, he has been criticized by our own Matthew Winzer as driving too-great a wedge between Sinai and the CoG.

If one makes too much of these "comparative" distinctions between secular covenant arrangements, identifying Moses' as the suzerain type over against the gracious royal grant type, using this distinction to "drive the train" so to speak, then this new Klinean version of CT will, ultimately separate from standard CT.

Better, I say, to understand Moses' first of all as another CoG administration, extension of the "royal grant" (to use Kline's language), having an "overlay" of the legal promise-curse, CoW flavor. After all, MOST of that covenant has to do not with land and civil justice, but with the religion of atonement and grace under types and shadows.

Make too much of the CoW-suzerain aspect, and you will end up making those things substantive, instead of accidental to the core reality.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --