# God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology



## Greg (Feb 22, 2006)

I see Michael Horton has recently put out this book. Has anyone read it yet?


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 22, 2006)

Literally JUST CAME out. Doubt very many have read it.


----------



## TimeRedeemer (Feb 26, 2006)

Does anybody know of any reviews available on the web regarding Horton's new book? (I find googling for book reviews to be the hardest kind of search engine activity...)


----------



## TimeRedeemer (Feb 26, 2006)

I found this blog post regarding Horton's new book. It's interesting in that the post writer states (whether he's speculating or not I don't know) that Horton's book draws from Meredith Kline's works and insights.


----------



## youthevang (Feb 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by TimeRedeemer_
> I found this blog post regarding Horton's new book. It's interesting in that the post writer states (whether he's speculating or not I don't know) that Horton's book draws from Meredith Kline's works and insights.



I just received my copy today...

It seems that Horton was highly influenced by Kline when writing this book.


----------



## TimeRedeemer (Feb 27, 2006)

> I just received my copy today...
> 
> It seems that Horton was highly influenced by Kline when writing this book.



Thanks! I find that interesting. I find Kline's works evocative and the fact that he is within the boundaries of classical covenant theology makes his work that much more fascinating. I should receive my copy of Horton's book next week...


----------



## Casey (Mar 1, 2006)

Could anyone who has this book offer their comments/opinions on pp. 44-46 (particularly beginning with the second full paragraph on p. 44 to the top of p. 46)?


----------



## crhoades (Mar 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> Could anyone who has this book offer their comments/opinions on pp. 44-46 (particularly beginning with the second full paragraph on p. 44 to the top of p. 46)?



What is the gist of the section? I'll probably pick up the book in a couple of weeks...


----------



## Me Died Blue (Mar 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by crhoades_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> ...



 on both points.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Mar 1, 2006)

Have it. Am reading it. Love it.

I got mine through the WSC bookstore (760 735 2665) or  here. I paid $13.00 and change + tax $14 and change. 

It's a little more technical than I imagined it would be. Elders and laity will want to read it slowly and look up at least some the passages cited. 

Yes, it's influenced by Kline, it's also influenced by Berkhof and lots of other folk including mainstream of 16th and 17th century Reformed covenant theology.

Readers will notice that, in the first part especially, most of the Biblical scholars he cites are not Reformed. Some are Jewish, some are Roman and some are just pagan. This fact suggests that he's drawing on a pretty broad consensus that there are two covenantal streams in the Hebrew Scriptures, a Suzerain-Vassal (SV) treaty pattern and a Royal-Grant (RG) pattern. 

The SV pattern is law (do and live) and the RG pattern is Gospel. The covenant of works and the Mosaic covenant, to the degree it is legal, is expressed in the SV form. By contrast, the covenant of grace and Davidic promise is expressed in the RG form. 

From there he moves to a survey of the three great biblical covenants and their ground in Scripture and thence to related issues (e.g., sacraments and church life).

rsc


----------



## Casey (Mar 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by crhoades_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> ...


This is not the entire section, but here is one paragraph in the section I'm asking about:



> _Horton, p. 45_
> Later in the story, God further rewards Abraham's obedience, when he is willing to offer up his son Isaac (Gen. 22:16-18). It is because of Abraham's faithfulness that Isaac and his heirs will now receive the outcome of the promises (Gen. 26:2ff.). Again, this is not the basis of Abraham's salvation, but the means through which that blessing comes to Abraham's heirs. "God was pleased," writes Kline, "to constitute Abraham's exemplary works as the meritorious ground for granting to Israel after the flesh the distinctive role of being formed as the typological kingdom, the matrix from which Christ should come." This does not mean, of course, that his obedience was the ground of his justification before God (which would contradict Genesis 15:6 and its New Testament interpretation), but that it was itself typological of Christ, who would merit by his obedience the reward of everlasting life that this old covenant economy foreshadowed.


He speaks in similar language concerning David in the section I'm asking about.

I'm on p. 48 of the book now. He seems to be heavily dependent on M. Kline. I'm already in the third chapter and he hasn't clearly described the Covenant of Works or the Covenant of Grace (or Redemption), though he has mentioned all three of them. He has said that some covenants are conditional and some unconditional, but hasn't said which are which. He seems to be slipping the various biblical covenants into two categories based on the research of Kline in respect to two kinds of Hittite treaties/covenants that existed prior to or contemporaneous with the Hebrew people.

So far (and I mean _so far_ since I'm only a forth through the book) I haven't been entirely satisfied with his heavy dependence on quoting Kline and referencing suzerainty treaties (and elaborately explaining them), especially since this is a popularly written book. God patterned salvation after Hittite covenants? That seems to be the jist of the book so far. But I seem to remember a covenant that God made with Adam before the Hittites existed . . yes? I'm not saying the suzerainty treaty research isn't helpful and enlightening, but . . .

Comments on the above quoted paragraph?


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Mar 1, 2006)

Casey,

Yes, he patterned part of salvation history and revelation after Hittite treaties and other types (see above). The Apostle John said "In the beginning the Logos..." Should he not have used a heavily freighted philosophical term liable to be misunderstood? 

What is the problem in principle with recognizing the Scripture comes to us as redemptive history progressively revealed in cultures, languages, and historical forms? 

Why is such a reconition a bad thing?

The ST comes in ch. 5.


----------



## Casey (Mar 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by R. Scott Clark_
> Casey,
> 
> Yes, he patterned part of salvation history and revelation after Hittite treaties and other types (see above). The Apostle John said "In the beginning the Logos..." Should he not have used a heavily freighted philosophical term liable to be misunderstood?
> ...


Oh, no, it's not a bad thing--it's helpful. I suppose it would have been, In my humble opinion, more helpful if placed _later_ in the book, like after formulating the doctrine some.

I guess my problem so far is more of one concerning his methodology. He's throwing around weighty theological terms that he isn't defining (at least up to the point that he's using them), such as the Covenant of Works, Grace, and Redemption. Considering it's a book on Covenant Theology, you'd think he'd do that early on. He also didn't, in my opinion (thus far), clearly explain that the Mosaic Covenant is _part of_ (an administration/dispensation of) the Covenant of Grace.

I should probably save my comments until I've finished the book. But, I'd still like to hear someone's opinion on the paragraph that I quoted above from the book. 

Then again, maybe I shouldn't be registering any complaints . . . I'm just a theological peon!


----------



## Me Died Blue (Mar 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> But, I'd still like to hear someone's opinion on the paragraph that I quoted above from the book.



The portion you quoted reminded me a lot of a discussion that went on awhile back regarding the relationship between Law and Gospel. In particular, the part of Horton's book you cited just seems to be speaking of _obedience_ as the factor in a covenant with respect to its _temporal_ blessings for that particular time in redemptive history.

Although I must admit I'm a bit confused at this point as well, because when the covenantal obedience-blessing element regarding the temporal RH blessings--what Horton really seems to be talking about in that paragraph--were discussed in the thread I cited above, with references to Scripture and several historic Reformed theologians, it was always the _Mosaic_ covenant that was spoken of as possessing an element of that nature and function - which made pretty good sense. So I can't help but wonder about the relationship (similarity versus difference) between _that_ element (Mosaic) and whatever Horton is speaking about concerning _Abraham_.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 2, 2006)

From what Dr. Clark has said in this thread, it sounds like a really wonderful book. He seems to be emphasizing a lot of pivotal issues related to CT, such as what covenants in the Bible are based upon, and how they are understood.


----------



## youthevang (Mar 3, 2006)

> I should probably save my comments until I've finished the book. But, I'd still like to hear someone's opinion on the paragraph that I quoted above from the book.



Casey, could you elaborate on what you might not agree with concerning the paragraph in question on pg. 45?


----------



## TimeRedeemer (Mar 4, 2006)

I'm disappointed Horton chooses to use the terminology 'Covenant of Creation' in place of 'Covenant of Works'. 

He claims of all the choices it is the best overall, but it clearly isn't:

1. It causes more confusion in this already confusing subject.
2. Works is an apt parallel to Grace to match the federal parallel of the first Adam and the Second Adam.
3. It's cowardly to shy away from the classic terminology just because some in the Reformed camp (so-called in the Reformed camp) find a Covenant of Works controversial.


----------



## Bryan (Mar 4, 2006)

Ordered my copy from a local bookstore today, can't wait to get it in a couple of weeks 

Bryan
SDG


----------



## Casey (Mar 6, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> ...


Thanks for the reply . . I'll have to take a look at that thread you referenced.


----------



## Casey (Mar 6, 2006)

> _Originally posted by youthevang_
> 
> 
> > I should probably save my comments until I've finished the book. But, I'd still like to hear someone's opinion on the paragraph that I quoted above from the book.
> ...


Well, it's not so much something that I disagree with . . I'm more just trying to understand what he's saying. I mean, if he wants to make any aspect of the promises dependent on anyone's meritorious work besides Christ, it's going to take a lot of well-articulated argumentation to convince me! I have a hard time believing that anyones' works merited any right to be in the land of Canaan, or any other such blessing.


----------



## youthevang (Mar 6, 2006)

> _Originally posted by StaunchPresbyterian_
> 
> I have a hard time believing that anyones' works merited any right to be in the land of Canaan, or any other such blessing.



I think I understand your concern. I think Kline's statement concerning Abraham's meritorious work (obedience) is justified by what was said to Abraham after he obeyed God:



> Then the Angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven and said, "By Myself I have sworn, says the Lord: *Because you have done this thing* and have not withheld your only son, I will indeed bless you and make your offspring as numerous as the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore. Your offspring will possess the gates of their enemies. And all the nations of the earth will be blessed by your offspring *because you have obeyed My command*." (Genesis 22:15-18)



[Edited on 3-6-2006 by youthevang]


----------



## yeutter (Mar 26, 2006)

When I read God of Promice: Introducing Covenant Theology, I did not expect it would cause me to rethink my understanding of the sacraments as signs and seals of the covenant. Prof. Horton has devoted 25 pages or so to dealing with the sacraments and their relationship to the covenant. I am going to have to go back to scripture and rethink some issues.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by yeutter_
> When I read God of Promice: Introducing Covenant Theology, I did not expect it would cause me to rethink my understanding of the sacraments as signs and seals of the covenant. Prof. Horton has devoted 25 pages or so to dealing with the sacraments and their relationship to the covenant. I am going to have to go back to scripture and rethink some issues.



Such as?


----------



## yeutter (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> [ Such as?


How we should understand the nature of the presence of our Lord in the sacraments, is the issue I am being forced to rethink. 

After reading Michael Horton, I wonder if Aquinas, Zwingli, and Luther were asking the right questions when they discussed the nature of our Lord's presence.

[Edited on 3-28-2006 by yeutter]


----------

