# The Noahic Covenant a Republished Covenant of Works?



## mvdm (Dec 18, 2015)

Heard the author of the article below recently argue that God's command to build and enter the ark and Noah's obedience was a covenant of works. Excluding Kline, is anyone aware of any theologian in Reformed history who advanced such an argument? 

http://www.modernreformation.org/de...&var2=504&var3=authorbio&var4=AutRes&var5=103


----------



## Romans922 (Dec 18, 2015)

I believe, I could be wrong, from my recent reading, this doesn't just cover Noah, but Abraham, Israel, and David in Kline. But Horton, Estelle, Dennis Johnson, VanDrunnen? are some guys that say similar things. 

Bryan D. Estelle, “Noah: A Righteous Man?” Modern Reformation 19/5 [Sept/Oct 2010]: 27. 
Michael Horton, "God of Promise, Introducing Covenant Theology" [2009], pp. 44-45. 
Dennis Johnson "Him We Proclaim: Preaching Christ from all the Scriptures" [2007], pp. 298-99

So basically Westminster West guys. :\


I think it is referred to in _The Law Is Not Of Faith_ also (Pg. 136).


Here is a critique that compares this view to those in the time of the Westminster Assembly who held a similar (yet different) view. https://d3ecc98b-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...unsjP3oiMZqEncOBxuShFnqh4iNSo=&attredirects=1


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Dec 18, 2015)

Although I cannot read the full article, I am quite disturbed by the paragraph that is shared. Particularly this statement:


> At this typological level, the works principle is operating. This is clear in that the covenant is conditioned on Noah's obedience to the terms-he must build an ark and get on board



I find that on one hand, they are the extreme opposite of the Federal Vision movement. On the other hand, they are in line with a "works" mentality like the Federal Vision movement.

How do they make justification for a CoW principle in the Noahic covenant?


----------



## mvdm (Dec 19, 2015)

Thanks, Andrew. I should have said "excluding Kline and his disciples" when I asked whether there is any precedent in Reformed history for positing a COW in the Noahic covenant. I've yet to find any, but perhaps I am missing it.


----------



## Romans922 (Dec 19, 2015)

Like I said, the article I linked talks about the Assembly, one group held a similar and yet still and altogether different view (substantial similarities and differences). That view notably was condemned by the assembly.


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 19, 2015)

> I believe, I could be wrong, from my recent reading, this doesn't just cover Noah, but Abraham, Israel, and David in Kline.



They might as well go the whole hog and ague that the New Testament is a Republication of the Covenant of Works, and according to their erroneous interpretative principles it probably wouldn't be difficult.


----------



## MW (Dec 20, 2015)

Peairtach said:


> They might as well go the whole hog and ague that the New Testament is a Republication of the Covenant of Works, and according to their erroneous interpretative principles it probably wouldn't be difficult.



Well observed. To accomplish redemption the second Adam endured the punishment and fulfilled the moral obligations of the covenant of works. In a dualistic "works-grace" scheme of redemptive history that would mean the New Testament was a republication of the covenant of works. But it ignores the fact that the fulfilment of the covenant of works is accomplished according to the terms of the everlasting covenant of grace. The "progress of redemption" through the ages prior to "the fulness of the time" was only possible because the covenant of grace was being administered in the lives of individuals.

The text of Genesis explicitly states that Noah found grace in God's sight and this gracious disposition was the basis of the covenant dispensation God "established" with him. His connection with the seed-promise of Gen. 3:15 is explicitly stated at the close of the genealogy in chap. 5. Heb. 11 calls him one of the elders of faith. If he were under the covenant of works he would have been condemned along with the rest of the antediluvian world; but by faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.


----------



## TheOldCourse (Dec 20, 2015)

I can't read any more than the snippet without a subscription, but it seems like it could be read as if he's merely saying that Noah is functioning as a type of Christ in preparing the ark by his obedience to deliver the covenant people. Speaking of this in terms of the covenant of works seems somewhat novel, but as long as he's using such language typologically (rather than functionally) to point towards the obedience of Christ this seems uncontroversial to me. Does he go beyond that in the rest of the article? 

I know Lee a bit and hadn't seen him wade into the republication debate too much before. He's primarily a pastor, but his scholarly background has been in historical covenantal theology, especially Cocceius (who, granted, had plenty of his own idiosyncracies).


----------

