# Is the Covenant of Grace Conditional? --- by K. C. Easterday



## biblelighthouse (Mar 27, 2006)

Kevin, you are a member on the PuritanBoard, right?

If so, can you tell me where I can find your article, "Is the Covenant of Grace Conditional?"

There is a broken link to this article on Monergism.com, and I can't seem to find the article anywhere else. 

Do you still have this article posted somewhere on the internet? If not, could you email your article to me? I would like to read it.

Thank you!


(In fact, if anyone knows where to find this article, please let me know.)




[Edited on 3-27-2006 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## kceaster (Mar 27, 2006)

*Joseph....*

I'm kinda reluctant to make that available again. It's been awhile since I wrote it and I think it needs to be revised. That's why I took it off my website.

The crux of the matter is whether or not the covenant of grace is a two-way street in the manner of Schilder. I argued that it is not. If God in Christ made a covenant to His seed (the elect), then there can be no breaking of that covenant by those graciously saved within it. Moreover, because Christ is not only the mediator but also the surety, then it cannot be broken.

Of course, the immediate question is, why the warnings? I think the warnings do apply to those who are in the visible adminstration of the covenant, but who are not elect. The warning passages are Heb 6:4-6, Mt 7:21-23 and Ro 11:17ff. The visible/invisble church distinction is important as well as the internal/external administration of the covenant of grace. If one is in the external administration but not in the internal administration, then although they seem to be in the covenant of grace, are really remanded to the covenant of works because Christ has not saved them. In that sense, they are covenant breakers, but only of the covenant of works, since by necessity, the covenant of grace is kept by Christ and all those He purchased by His blood and righteousness.

If you really, really, really want it. I will send it to you with the caveat that it was an early work that I reserve the right to revise and correct.

Blessings,

KC


----------



## Mayflower (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by kceaster_
> I'm kinda reluctant to make that available again. It's been awhile since I wrote it and I think it needs to be revised. That's why I took it off my website.
> 
> The crux of the matter is whether or not the covenant of grace is a two-way street in the manner of Schilder. I argued that it is not. If God in Christ made a covenant to His seed (the elect), then there can be no breaking of that covenant by those graciously saved within it. Moreover, because Christ is not only the mediator but also the surety, then it cannot be broken.
> ...



Dear Kevin,

Have you read: 
"The covenant of God and the children of believers by David J. Engelsma"? 

I think you find it interesting, because it goes also against the view of Klaas Schilder, and Engelsma also is writting that the covenant cannot be broken by those graciously saved within it. Moreover, because Christ is not only the mediator but also the surety, then it cannot be broken. 

For me it was a great book, and a friend of mine will transelated the book in Dutch, and this friend just left the Gereformeerd vrijgemaakt (Church of Klaas Schilder).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

249 pp.
Hardcover
ISBN 0-916206-91-2

DESCRIPTION
Reformed Theologian David J. Engelsma contends for Calvinism against one of the gravest threats to Reformed Christianity since the Synod of Dordt in the early seventeenth century. The threat is the denial not only of justification by faith alone, but also of all the doctrines of grace. Like the Arminians heresy, the contemporary attack on the Reformed faith comes from within. It is found in those Reformed and Presbyterian churches that still claim adherence to the Reformation creeds. Those who launch the attack occupy pulpits and seminary chairs in these reputedly conservative churches.
What makes the attack especially dangerous is that it consists of a development of a doctrine of the covenant that is popular in Reformed and Presbyterian churches. The newest form of the age-old attack on the gospel of salvation by sovereign grace is covenant doctrine. It called itself the "œfederal vision," that is, "œcovenant vision."
The Covenant of God and the Children of Believers defends the Reformed faith against the current attack by exposing the doctrine of the covenant from which the attack arises. This is something that few, if any, of the opponents of the federal visions have done. At the same time, the book sets forth the doctrine of the covenant that safeguards and promotes the gospel of sovereign grace, demonstrating that this covenant doctrine is biblical, confessional, and traditionally Reformed.
Since the controversy centers around the inclusion of the children of believers in the covenant, this book emphasizes the rightful place of children in the covenant of grace and the proper rearing of them. These are truths of the greatest practical importance for godly parents, as also for Reformed churches and Christian schools. Consideration of the inclusion of children in the covenant enables the author to distinguish the covenant views of the Protestant Reformed Churches, Baptists, the Netherlands Reformed Congregations, and the Canadian Reformed Churches ("œliberated"). Leading representatives of these churches and traditions join in the discussion.
An entire chapter is devoted to the comfort of godly parents at the death of infant children.
All those who are concerned about the contemporary controversy over justification, as well as those who simply have an interest in the covenant of God with the children of believers, will benefit from this book.

http://www.rfpa.org/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=86

[Edited on 3-27-2006 by Mayflower]


----------



## kceaster (Mar 27, 2006)

Thanks for the recommendation, Ralph. I'll take a look at this when I get a chance.

As for Schilder, I once had a link on my website to a lecture he had given on the covenant. But once I found out he thought the covenant was a two-way street, I deleted the link. I'm quite sure he's had an influence on the federal vision guys. I'm glad your friend is getting away from that.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Mayflower (Mar 27, 2006)

Here is a translation of Klaas Schilder :

" In the covenant of grace are all those whom belong to the Lord Jesus Christ as those whom are not paid by Him. Haters of God are as in the covenant as those whom love the Lord God. Yes in the same way are those in the covenant who love the Lord as those who hate the Lord...." ( K. Schilder, Looze kalk 1946, pag. 4,5)

[Edited on 3-27-2006 by Mayflower]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by kceaster_
> I'm kinda reluctant to make that available again. It's been awhile since I wrote it and I think it needs to be revised. That's why I took it off my website.



Ok, I understand. I didn't realize you intentionally took it off the internet.

I'm updating the Covenant Theology section on Monergism.com, and the link to your article is a broken link. I would be happy to redirect the link to another URL. But if you do not want to make the article available anymore, I will just remove the link from Monergism.com.

I would still like to read the article, though. Please email it to me if you get a chance. 

Thank you!

Your brother in Christ,
Joseph


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Mar 27, 2006)

Joseph,
When did you start working for monergism? Pretty cool


----------



## biblelighthouse (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Joseph,
> When did you start working for monergism? Pretty cool



John Hendryx (owner of Monergism.com) emailed me and asked me if I would be interested in working on the Covenant Theology section of Monergism.com. I told him I would be happy to do so.

Keep watching the Covenant Theology section on Monergism.com . . . it should be updated within the next few days this week . . .


----------



## turmeric (Mar 27, 2006)

Glad to hear it, Joseph!


----------

