Cornelius Vanderwaal and the Covenant?

Status
Not open for further replies.

RamistThomist

Puritanboard Clerk
I have seen a bunch of commentaries by this gentleman. Given his Dutch background, where did he stand on covenant issues? Was he in the Klaas Schilder school? Monocoventalist like Hoekesma?
 
VanderWaal came from the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands (Liberated) -- Schilder did serve at the seminary of these churches and he was instrumental in the Liberation of 1944. VanderWaal later served in South Africa, but he was a bit of a controversial figure. Can we say that he is from "Schilder's school"? In the sense that he studied at the seminary where Schilder taught, I suppose. But you would find differences in their doctrine of the covenant and elsewhere in their theology (especially eschatology).
 
Jacob,
Just a comment about Hoeksema. You say he was a monocovenantalist and I don't think that is accurate. He acknowledges a covenant in the garden of Eden with Adam as the federal head, which he has called the covenant of creation but he denies that this was a covenant of works wherein Adam could "merit" eternal life.
Jim
 
Providing some insight on Vanderwaal's views, here is a review of van der Waal's work on the covenant:

Biblical Horizons » No. 16: Book Review: Cornelius van der Waal, The Covenantal Gospel

I can't let a link to James Jordan's website go by without a warning. Jordan is a dangerous heretic, and the godfather of the Federal Vision. That doesn't mean he never has good things to say, but I had to plug that in there.

Mark, I don't mean to associate you with the Federal Vision or anything like it. I hope you will forgive my insistence on warning people about Jordan and his followers when their works are linked to.
 
Cornelius van der Waal's book The Covenantal Gospel was favourably reviewed in the Standard Bearer issue of 15 Sept 1991. In answer to Jacob's original question he seems to fall between Meredith Kline, Klaas Schilder and Herman Hoeksema in understanding of the covenant.
The great weakness of the book is van der Waal's failure to provide a concise definition of the covenant. He says that the elect and God's covenantal people should not be used interchangeably. For van der Waal the covenant is a treaty between God and His people. In the treaty God makes and oath and promise to save his people in Jesus Christ. Attached in the Covenant to this promise are the obligations or demands of the Covenant; and the threats to those who break the Covenant.
On the other hand, van der Waal insists that in the Covenant obedience to the Lord is based on election.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top