the Reformers and Covenant Theology

forgivenmuch · #1 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 07:03 PM

Hello all, I am hoping some of you can help me. I am writing a paper for school critiquing Ryrie's chapter in Dispensationalism on Covenant Theology. In the chapter Ryrie claims that covenant theology was "not even mentioned by the primary leaders of the Reformation" (215), and says that it is post-reformation. Can someone help me confirm or refute this point? He acknowledges that Calvin hints at the concept of covenant but not anything near the system we now have today.
He also claims that covenant theology has undergone changes and revisions to the point that it is not the same as what was set forth by Cocceius. He also implies that Berkhof and Allis made statements regarding two ways of salvation (224) (the very thing he claims dispensationalists are criticized for). This, of course, we would vehemently deny, but he says it. Lastly, he criticizes the biblical basis and the hermeneutics of covenant theology. To anyone who is familiar with this book and specifically this chapter, is there any other helpful or pertinent information you can give me, or directions you can lead me in? This ended up longer than I intended it to. My main question regards the teaching of covenant theology in the Reformers, but anything helps. Thank you all very much.

I apologize, I meant for this to be in the Covenant Theology forum, not the dispensationalism forum.

SolaGratia · #2 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 07:24 PM

Prof. Clark has some helpful resources:

Westminster Seminary California clark

For example, there is Vos on the History of Covenant Theology

http://www.biblicaltheology.org/dcrt.pdf

and great primary quotes from the Reformers that Prof Clark has put together:

http://www.wscal.edu/clark/classicalcovtheology.php

-----Added 9/28/2009 at 07:24:25 EST-----

Zacharias Ursinus (1534-83). Q.36 What distinguishes law and gospel? A: The law contains a covenant of nature begun by God with men in creation, that is, it is a natural sign to men, and it requires of us perfect obedience toward God. It promises eternal life to those keeping it, and threatens eternal punishment to those not keeping it. In fact, the gospel contains a covenant of grace, that is, one known not at all under nature. This covenant declares to us fulfillment of its righteousness in Christ, which the law requires, and our restoration through Christ's Spirit. To those who believe in him, it freely promises eternal life for Christ's sake (Larger Catechism, Q. 36).

**Prufrock** · #3 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 07:26 PM

Bullinger, in particular, made great use of the Covenant as an organizational tool for teaching the whole of scripture starting from the 1520s. In the Swiss Reformation, where they dealt very much with the Anabaptist threat, the Swiss Reformed theologians were forced to use the concept rather extensively to refute Anabaptist claims about the invalidity of the Old Testament. In the German churches, such teachers as Olevian wrote an extended treatise on the Covenant in the second half of the 1500s; in Britain, you have many theologians writing extensively on the same: Robert Rollock for an earlier example, and John Ball and Thomas Blake for later examples, yet before Cocceius' treatise. Cocceius, indeed, stands at the head of Federal theology as a fully developed system and methodology, but it is beyond disingenuous to say that Covenant Theology did not exist before him. It should be noted that those mentioned above are only a small few who developed the covenant model in great depth. Many others who did not develop a system which utilized the Covenant as fairly central to its organization, yet made elaborate use include Ursinus, Perkins, Polanus, Wolleb, Martini, Ames, Preston, [John Cameron], Cloppenberg, Musculus, Junius, etc.

Richard Tallach · #4 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 07:35 PM

Bullinger (Heinrich, Swiss, 1504-75) must not be confused with a much later Bullinger (Ethelbert William, English, 1837-1913). The latter was a noted dispy.

Heinrich_Bullinger

Ethelbert_William_Bullinger

Hamalas · #5 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Tallach

Bullinger (Heinrich, Swiss, 1504-75) must not be confused with a much later Bullinger (Ethelbert William, English, 1837-1913). The latter was a noted dispy.

How confusing!

***Contra_Mundum*** · #6 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 09:03 PM

All theology is constantly in a process of enrichment, refinement, elaboration, or transformatinon. Because it is a field of knowledge, and this is science of a kind. The stuff we're working with is Sacred Writ, and there is good science and bad.

But just because there was only a very elementary way to talk about it, and understood with far less precision, does not mean that thermonuclear reaction wasn't taking place (in the sun) in the ages before Einstein or even Newton.

Covenant Theology is the name for what mostly Reformed folk have called the biblical revelation story-arc of redemption since the post-reformation era. It appears to us to be the Bible's own organizing developmental principle.

As Ligon Duncan has demonstrated (PhD, University of Edinburgh), covenant theology, minus the name, can be found in the writing of Irenaeus. Irenaeus describes the history of redemption, and even uses divine covenants as markers. And furthermore, Dr. Duncan shows that the Reformers were aware of the use church fathers made of this approach in their own appropriation and development.

SolaGratia · #7 (**permalink**) 09-28-2009, 09:12 PM

Jen, of the PB and student at WSC, wrote this wonderful paper title, The Covenant in Patristic Thought. It is found in her website under Westminster Seminary California, here:

Papers per caliginem

Scott1 · #8 (**permalink**) 09-29-2009, 12:33 PM

And remember, the Westminster Confession of Faith is covenant theology.

discipulo · #9 (**permalink**) 09-29-2009, 01:06 PM

being portuguese it is not easy for me to write in english, so I keep

quoting and recommending books, I hope you understand

This is a great work, I'm still biginning to read it, but I believe it can be

of majour help for your paper.

It starts with the development of the Doctrine of the Covenant in Medieval

Theology, namely the very central Augustine,

and the very interesting Fransciscan Covenantal formulation of the

Sacraments: Gabriel Biel, Scotus, Bonaventure, Ockham,

then Luther Melanchton, the Swiss Reformers, first Zwingli later Bullinger,

till Calvin.

Peter Lillback - The Binding of God Calvin's Role in the Development of Covenant Theology

Amazon

carlgobelman · #10 (**permalink**) 09-29-2009, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott1

And remember, the Westminster Confession of Faith is covenant theology.

In particular Chapter VII of the WCF:

Quote:

I. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which He has been pleased to express by way of covenant.[1]

II. The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works,[2] wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity,[3] upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.[4]

III. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second,[5] commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved,[6] and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.[7]

IV. 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.[8]

V. This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the Gospel:[9] 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;[10] 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,[11] by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the Old Testament.[12]

VI. Under the Gospel, when Christ, the substance,[13] was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper:[14] which, though fewer in number, and administered with more simplicity, and less outward glory, yet, in them, it is held forth in more fullness, evidence, and spiritual efficacy,[15] to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles;[16] and is called the New Testament.[17] There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.[18]

forgivenmuch · #11 (**permalink**) 10-27-2009, 06:20 PM

I know this is late, but thank you all very much for your help! I appreciate it.