View Single Post
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 11-26-2008, 02:13 PM
greenbaggins's Avatar
greenbaggins greenbaggins is offline.
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hague, North Dakota
Posts: 3,063
Thanks: 981
Thanked 2,451 Times in 840 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTaron View Post
Quote:
That covenant equals the moral law,
Lane, where in the moral law are we required not to eat of the tree that is in the midst of the garden? The covenant was with Adam the first and us in him.

I agree with Fred, "a republication creates far more problems than it solves" the first problem I see is that the covenant of works is changed, the bar is lowered and you have to ignore the fact that you come out of the womb guilty.
Your first question is not to the point, since, as 19.1 explicitly states the entire moral law was given to Adam AS the covenant of works. The CoW is a whole lot more than just the forbidding of the fruit. We are commanded to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind. In that one command is summarized whether God will be Adam's God (Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind). So the one command not to eat of the tree has to be set alongside the creation mandate given to Adam, and the entire moral law given to Adam.

As to your second point, I really don't see how coming out of the womb guilty assaults my point. We are part of the CoW as covenant breakers until God changes our covenant status to members of the CoG. How in the world is that lowering the bar?
__________________
Rev. Lane Keister
Teaching Elder, PCA, North Dakota (working out of bounds in a CRC and an RCA church)
http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com
http://brahmsgreenglove.blogspot.com
http://accenttranslation.blogspot.com
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?