I’ve already asked questions about the Mosaic Covenant but I’m still not sure if I completely get it.

Horton says that the Mosaic Covenant is really a republication of the CoW and backs that up with the, ‘this do and live,’ language used.
Others, such as O. Palmer Robertson see the Mosaic Covenant as part of the CoG.
Witsius seems to take a mediating view, in Book 4 of, ‘The Economy of the Covenants,’ he makes the point that the Mosaic Covenant was not formally a CoW because among other things a Cow cannot be made with a sinner. He then goes on to say that the Mosaic Covenant was not formally a CoG because a CoG requires not only obedience but also provides the strength to obey.

My problem is I can see arguments for all the positions laid out above and so I have kind of got myself confused. I would probably lean towards the Mosaic Covenant being administration of the CoG as that makes sense to me. If God were progressively revealing a plan of redemption that would point towards the mediator of the Covenant why would He suddenly introduce a covenant that was not of Grace?

So what is the Mosaic Covenant, CoW, CoG or something else? …..Help please.

__________________
Stephen Spence

A Presbyterian attending a Baptist church

According to the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Mosaic Covenant is an administration of the covenant of grace -- it says nothing about it being a republication of the covenant of works:

CHAPTER 7
Of God's Covenant with Man

2. The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.

3. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein he freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life his Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.

4. This covenant of grace is frequently set forth in Scripture by the name of a testament, in reference to the death of Jesus Christ the Testator, and to the everlasting inheritance, with all things belonging to it, therein bequeathed.

5. This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the gospel: under the law, it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all foresignifying Christ to come; which were, for that time, sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the old testament.

__________________
Casey Bessette
Westminster OPC • West Suburbs of Chicago • My Blog: Paradise Regained

"It is part of the calling of the ekklesia to learn to know the love of Christ that surpasses all knowledge and also to make known within the world of science 'the manifold wisdom of God' in order that the final end of theology, as of all things, may be that the name of the Lord is glorified. Theology and dogmatics, too, exist for the Lord's sake." — Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 46

However, there is an element of the CoW being republished when you look at WCF 19.1-2, where the law is spoken of as the moral law given to Adam as a covenant of works. The covenant of works was broken, but that does not mean it is not still in effect. Yes, fundamentally, the Mosaic covenant is part of the CoG. However, for those who did not trust proleptically in Jesus, they were still under the terms of the CoW, which was always a hypothetical way to eternal life (though made impossible by human sin). The reason this is important is that Christ fulfilled all the terms of the CoW so that it might be a CoG to us. Imputation of Christ's merit hinges on this point.

__________________
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?

Rev. Keister, the issue is that the Confession doesn't say that there is an element of the CoW in the Mosaic covenant. All it says is that the law was given. Was not the law also given by Christ and his apostles? In the new covenant, is there not an element of law (i.e., the law has a place in regard to good works/sanctification)? If so, then following your logic, there's an element of the CoW in the new covenant (if wherever law is there is also an element of CoW). I agree, though, that those outside of faith are still under the penalty of the broken CoW, and I agree that the law serves a prominent role in the Mosaic covenant, but I don't see the Confession anywhere saying that the Mosaic covenant is an republication of the CoW (I think that's reading into the Confession something that isn't there, IMHO).

Stephen,

The covenant of works is still in force for all who are not in Christ; the covenant of grace is in force for all who are in Christ. Moses forsook the riches of Egypt for the reproach of Christ. This makes him a Christian.

The giving of the Law is not contrary to the promise of the gospel (see Paul's argument in Galatians 3, I believe).

IF, however, I am a wicked man, I will interpret the Law as a covenant of works, and will be judged by it (see Romans 2 - 3). However, IF, I see the Law as part of the administration of God's gracious covenant, then I will not misapply it as leading to "do this and live".

Each view you mentioned has some merit: one recognizing the ongoing validity of the covenant of works. One recognizing that God's intention and end in view in giving the Law is not to teach us justification by our works, but rather to slay our pride, humble us in the dust, and drive us to Christ alone for our justification.

The Law, in a civil sense, is to be administered impartially, and under the "lex taliones" principle: eye for an eye, etc. There is NO mercy in the civil administration of the law. God commands this to be so. No mercy in administering civil sanctions of the Law. BUT, thank God for His marvelous mercy in our salvation from the curse of the Law in HIS court room, by our Surety, Jesus Christ!

By the by, this is the beauty of our Confession: it balances the Moral Law's use in justification, sanctification, civil application, etc.

Cheers,

Adam

__________________
Adam Brink, Grace Church of Pleasanton, PCA, Pleasanton, California

"Mark you this, Bassanio, The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart: O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!"

Antonio - The Merchant of Venice (Act 1, Scene 3)

The Westminster Standards teach that the Covenant given at Sinai was indeed a republication of the Covenant of Works:

"God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it: and endued him with power and ability to keep it. This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness, and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables: the four first commandments containing our duty towards God; and the other six our duty to man."

__________________
Richard
CofE
UK

But again, that's not what the Confession says. It says the "law . . . continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness"; it doesn't say that the CoW was "republished." Following your logic, the New Covenant (in which the same "law" continues) is also a republication of the CoW.

Dealing with the issue of the NC; the law given to Adam which was made known again to Israel is written on our hearts.

As for republication. What law did Jesus keep on your behalf?

I am in the middle of an essay so will return later but try this:

Reformed Interpretation of the Mosaic Covenant

and these:

The Sinaitic/Mosaic Covenant: Works or Grace? Turretin Explains… « The Reformed Reader

pilgrim people-christ urc-reformed - the latest post - Owen on the Mosaic*Covenant

Glad you brought up Turretin, whose treatment of this is as good as anyone's.

Friends, I was merely commenting on the teaching of the Confession. In the chapter on the covenants, it gives no nod to the notion that the Mosaic covenant is a republication of the CoW. In the chapter on the law, it says the same law (not "covenant") was given again at Sinai. Of course other authors should be consulted.

I have only one problem with referring to the Mosaic economy as a "republication of the CoW" (but its significant).

Confessionally speaking, we have to see Moses principally as an administration of the CoG. The Law comes along as an "overlay". I think this is borne out by Gal 3:19.

And, as I've stated elsewhere, so far as the CoW aspect is made more prominent (which is how I read Kline), so far does that reading render the CoG aspect into an "overlay" or "attachment".

I would argue that the whole Pentateuch argues against such a reading. Buried in the heart of the Law is the whole sacrificial/priestly system, Leviticus, right in the middle. To say Grace is attached I think misses the point entirely. The "foundation" isn't Law; rather, one must burrow down into and through the Law in order to properly arrive at the essence of the CoG. Again, the Law is what was "added".

So, I say go ahead and use "republication of the CoW," just understand how it comes in the schema.

__________________
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? --

But Casey, it equates the law with the covenant when it says "as a covenant." Furthermore, the next section emphasizes the continuity between Adam and Moses, and mentions no discontinuity. Taken altogether, therefore, we can say that the Mosaic economy was part of the CoG, with an overlay (I like Bruce's word here) of the CoW.

Friend, I don't see the Confession equating law with covenant. The law always existed; the covenant didn't always exist -- right? WCF 7.1 makes it clear that the covenant is a condescension. Hypothetically, God could have created Adam and not entered into a covenant with him (though Adam would still be required to obey the law, only without any promise of reward). The law always just is, as an expression of God's character; but the covenant just doesn't exist, God must will it and reveal it -- and in the case of the CoW, the law forms the stipulation of the first covenant.

So, yes, the Confession says that the law was given "as a covenant of works" to Adam, but it doesn't say that the law was given "as a covenant of works" to Moses. The chapter is on the law, not on the covenants. It seems more to suggest that it was given to Moses because God's people had gradually lost an understanding of what God requires (as a rule of gratitude, hence, "I have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of bondage, therefore live in this way . . ."). If the Confession wished to communicate the idea of "republication of CoW," then it would have done so in its chapter on the covenants, no? It seems miguided to develop foundational views of the covenants from the chapter on the law (instead of the chapter on the covenants!).

Again, following this logic that you are employing, there is no way to deny that the CoW also "overlays" the new covenant (because in the new covenant, just as in the Mosaic covenant, we are told to love God and neighbor). WCF 19.5 says that the "moral law doth forever bind all" -- if law = CoW, then even Christians remain in the CoW. But that seems to me to just cloud things up, just as it clouds things up to say the Mosaic covenant is both CoW and CoG.

But perhaps I am misunderstanding you? Please correct me if I am, brother!

Casey,
If I might suggest reading 2 Cor 3, with attention to vv13-16, and the beginning of ch4, in order to see something of how the Law given to Moses hid the CoG from many of those to whom it was formally given.

The CoW is first; and it is superseded by the CoG. But in Moses a veil is added. Now, there is no more "law" covering or hiding the CoG. There is no more national covenant, no more such types and shadows.

We do deny there is a CoW "overlay" anymore. The binding moral law is that which is being reinscribed upon the hearts of believers through sanctification. So it comes not over or above grace, blinding us (unless one uses it "unlawfully"); but rather from the very renewed soul within, a true "work of God" (Phil 2:13).

Our perception of the law comes from inside out (even as the Israelites should have learned to view it, but most did not). They should have found the CoG, and looked outward to the Law (back and forth, Ex. and Dt.). Instead they looked into and upon the law from outside.

We simply look back through the Cross (grace) and see the moral standard (law), even as we recognize that we are "new creations" in Christ. Grace produces works in keeping with God's law. Grace has come entirely after the law for us.

Thanks for the post, Rev. Buchanan. I think I share your concern: It seems that those who speak of the Mosaic covenant as a republication of the CoW are not very quick to speak of it as an administration of the CoG. I still don't see the republication idea (as a "covenant of works") in the Confession, though I do see a republication of the law as law per se. The Israelites were prone to misunderstand (e.g., Nicodemus!).

I, for one, have been very quick to say that it is part of the administration of the CoG. How could it be otherwise when it happened after the Fall? However, advocates of the position that the Mosaic economy is *only* part of the CoG have not been very quick to see that such is a simplistic position that does not take into account the place of the law as a "Do this and live" pedagogical-use-of-the-law overlay of the CoW. Casey, the aspects of WCF19.1-2 emphasize the continuity of the Adamic administration with the Mosaic. That aspect regards the very terms of the CoW itself. Plus, we all hold that the CoW is still in effect. This leads inevitably to the conclusion that there is an aspect of republication of the CoW in the Mosaic economy in addition to its being part of the CoG.

I've seen many who whish to speak that way quick to point out that it is an admin. of the CoG.

I think many who hear the language "repub. of CoW" are too quick to think it is a denial of the Mosaic economy's status as admin. of CoG.

So, maybe the reverse is true . . .

__________________
Regards,

J.J.
PCA
Suffix

Hello All,

I've been reading a tretise by John Flavel on this very issue recently. I think it may be a blessing in explaining some of the points discuss.

Enjoy:

Vindiciæ Legis et Fœderis* - Rev. John Flavel

Cheers,

In case anyone is wondering, this treatise is located in volume 6 of the Banner of Truth edition of his works. Thanks for directing me to this treatise. It looks wonderful.

I've enjoyed the contents so far.

Happy reading!

For the biblical record, it is not sai