Is God ever under obligation?
- Thread starter Peters
- Start date
- Status
SolaScriptura
Puritanboard Brimstone
God is ever in obligation to His creation only when He voluntarily commits himself.
Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
Only by His own decree's and council.
I. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.[1]
1. Isa. 40:13-17; Job 9:32-33; 22:2-3; 35:7-8; Psa. 113:5-6; Luke 17:10; Acts 17:24-25
I. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.[1]
1. Isa. 40:13-17; Job 9:32-33; 22:2-3; 35:7-8; Psa. 113:5-6; Luke 17:10; Acts 17:24-25
Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
I have no problem with the term. The confession calls it:
"voluntary condescension"
alwaysreforming
Puritan Board Sophomore
What about Rom 4:1-5:
(1) What, then, shall we say Abraham our father, to have found, according to flesh?
(2) for if Abraham by works was declared righteous, he hath to boast--but not before God;
(3) for what doth the writing say? `And Abraham did believe God, and it was reckoned to him--to righteousness;'
(4) and to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt;
(5) and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned--to righteousness:
Here it seems that God would perhaps be "obligated" to reward a good work. Is this not the same situation that exists with Jesus Christ in His finished and perfect work? Isn't there a "legal obligation" to reward such a perfect work?
Its difficult to talk about God being "bound" in any sense of the word, but isn't He? Doesn't He "swear by Himself" in order to highlight this very fact?
(1) What, then, shall we say Abraham our father, to have found, according to flesh?
(2) for if Abraham by works was declared righteous, he hath to boast--but not before God;
(3) for what doth the writing say? `And Abraham did believe God, and it was reckoned to him--to righteousness;'
(4) and to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt;
(5) and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned--to righteousness:
Here it seems that God would perhaps be "obligated" to reward a good work. Is this not the same situation that exists with Jesus Christ in His finished and perfect work? Isn't there a "legal obligation" to reward such a perfect work?
Its difficult to talk about God being "bound" in any sense of the word, but isn't He? Doesn't He "swear by Himself" in order to highlight this very fact?
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
You are correct Christpher. God condescends to make that covenant with man. He didn't have to do it. But He bound Himself to man in that covenant of works, determining all the terms Himself by which Adam (and later Christ) could inherit the reward. The whole relationship is not only God binding himself to man, but in a way that He was so pleased to do.
cultureshock
Inactive User
When using the terms "grace" or "graciousness" as technical, precise, theological language, I would reserve those terms for acts of God's favor towards men who have demerited it. In other words, grace presupposes sin. Thus, I would argue, God's voluntary condescension is different than grace (in this technical sense of using the word).
Brian
That is a helpful point, Brian. I´m struggling to see how Adam is not obligating God, since his obedience comes from a righteousness that is not imputed as a gift to him by grace, but is in fact an inherent part of his natural constitution. In other words, Adam´s obedience, in a covenant of works paradigm, comes from Adam and nowhere else. Therefore, God is obligated to bless a creature for independent, self-wrought righteousness. To say, "œwell God just chose to obligate Himself" doesn´t really deal with the problem as I see it. What do you think?
cultureshock
Inactive User
Under the covenant of works paradigm, Adam's works do come from Adam. And yet, Adam did not come from himself. God created Adam. All of Adam's natural abilities are gifts, but not gifts of grace (in the technical sense of the word, as I have defined it). Adam does depend on God. Yet, the principle of works was set in place by God, thus obligating himself to an agreement, or a covenant.
Brian
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
Can I think beyond the Covenant of Works as well?
If so:
If so:
Sorry Marcos.
You asked first "Is God under obligation?" Maybe you were looking for a specific answer or wanted to think purely in a Creator/creation relationship. I was only pointing out a case where God placed Himself under obligation in a promise made to Abraham within the CoG.
If it's Off Topic and not what you were looking for then I apologize.
- Status
