Having been raised in a dispensational camp, covenant theology is a foreign topic to me. But now that my eyes have been opened I have been studying and trying to understand it in and how to relate other things (sacrements, eschatology etc) to it..

Am I right to say that there are 3 covenants?

1) A covenant within the trinity to accomplish and apply redemption

2) A pre-fall covenant of works

3) A post-fall covenant of grace

With this raised several questions,

1. How does the temporal covenant within the trinity relate to the supra/infra lapsarian issue? Is it the first covenant by logical sequence or casual sequence?

2. Whilst we are certainly justified by faith through grace and are under the covenant of grace, it is Christ's obedience in the fulfilling of the law and righteousness that accomplished (what adam failed) and brought us into eternal life (which adam couldn't). In this sense Christ fulfilled the covenant of works. Was the covenant of works still in place even after adam sinned and the promise came?

3. Am I correct in understanding that the covenant of grace is that which brings us into the finished work of Christ that fulfilled for us the covenant of works?

4. Is the New covenant new only in comparison to the mosaic covenant while technically it is the fulfillment of the covenant of grace introduced after the fall?

Any help is greatly appreciated... =)

__________________
Ewen
1689 LBCF
Assemblies of God Bible College
Singapore

On question 1, I would say that the covenant of redemption does not impact the question of supra/infra lapsarianism. It could be formulated to fit with either position. The Father could have agreed with the Son to save people regarded as lost (infra), or the Father could have agreed with the Son to elect some and condemn others as considered in se. Personally, my view is that the whole lapsarian question is moot, since God's decrees are eternal, and none can be said to happen before the other. Of course, people tell me that it is a logical order. However, the debates always wind up using temporal language to express a logical sequence, which to my mind is not helpful.

2. The covenant of works is always in place, even though it is broken. All those who are not part of the covenant of grace are still obligated to obey the broken covenant of works. "Do this and live" is the classic expression of this truth.

3. You are correct.

4. The covenant of grace was started in Genesis 3. While it has been administered under different periods or epochs, there is a fundamental underlying continuity. The newness of the New Covenant is simply that the fulfillment has come in an eschatological manner. With Christ's coming, we have the beginning of the end.

__________________
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?

Thanks Rev Keister! You've certainly cleared up a lot. Last two questions...

With the continuity of the covenants in mind,

1) Is it always the "remnant faithful" within Israel that God is disposed toward which after Christ's coming has been expanded into the church?

2) If so, does that mean Israel outside of the church is in a sense "cut off"? What is the role and place of Israel now?

1. Right. Christ is the faithful remnant, and all who are elect are elect in the faithful remnant. Being in Christ is the only way now to be the true children of Abraham (see Galatians 3 and 6).

2. No one is cut out who is in Christ. There are many faithful Jews who trust in Jesus. Supersession, therefore, is too strong a word for what we believe. We believe in remnant theology in Reformed circles. We believe that Christ is the true and faithful remnant of Israel, and the only way for Jew or Gentile to be a child of Abraham is to trust in Christ alone. There is only one olive tree (Romans 11).

Thank you very much sir!