In the various threads on the nature of the Mosaic covenant, advocates for viewing it as a republication of the covenant of works often use two lines of argument to prove their position. The first line of argument is the aspect of conditionality; it is maintained that a covenant of grace, strictly so called, cannot have conditions. The second line of argument is the aspect of condemnation; it is maintained that a covenant of grace, strictly so called, does not lead to condemnation but to salvation.
We read in John 3:18, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." This text is undoubtedly speaking about the gospel as an administration of the covenant of grace. In this administration there is conditionality -- the exercise of faith in the revelation of the only begotten Son of God. There is also condemnation to those who have not exercised faith in the Son of God.
It is an obvious fact that conditionality and condemnation are part and parcel of the administration of the covenant of grace under the gospel. Conditionality and condemnation are not brought in as another covenant, but are components of the gospel. It is undoubtedly true that they are administered (preached and signified) in subordination to the eternal purpose of the covenant of grace, which is to redeem the elect throught Jesus Christ; but it still remains an undisputed fact that the covenant of grace is administered under the gospel by means of conditional promises of eternal life and the threat of eternal damnation.
Given this state of affairs, it must be admitted that the presence of conditionality and condemnation under the law is no argument for the Mosaic economy being viewed as a republication of the covenant of works as a distinct covenant to the Abrahamic promise. If the fulness of the gospel includes conditionality and condemnation within its terms of administration then we would expect that the law, as a shadow of the good things to come, would also be administered with the components of conditionality and condemnation included in it.
We read in John 3:18, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." This text is undoubtedly speaking about the gospel as an administration of the covenant of grace. In this administration there is conditionality -- the exercise of faith in the revelation of the only begotten Son of God. There is also condemnation to those who have not exercised faith in the Son of God.
It is an obvious fact that conditionality and condemnation are part and parcel of the administration of the covenant of grace under the gospel. Conditionality and condemnation are not brought in as another covenant, but are components of the gospel. It is undoubtedly true that they are administered (preached and signified) in subordination to the eternal purpose of the covenant of grace, which is to redeem the elect throught Jesus Christ; but it still remains an undisputed fact that the covenant of grace is administered under the gospel by means of conditional promises of eternal life and the threat of eternal damnation.
Given this state of affairs, it must be admitted that the presence of conditionality and condemnation under the law is no argument for the Mosaic economy being viewed as a republication of the covenant of works as a distinct covenant to the Abrahamic promise. If the fulness of the gospel includes conditionality and condemnation within its terms of administration then we would expect that the law, as a shadow of the good things to come, would also be administered with the components of conditionality and condemnation included in it.