Peairtach
Puritan Board Doctor
Isn't the typological and also real theme of God's people, in God's place, doing God's will, what some Covenant Theologians, are mistakenly calling a "Republication of the Covenant of Works" ?
In Eden we have Adam and Eve as God's people in God's place doing God's will. When they lose favour with God because of their braking the Covenant of Works, they are cast out of the Garden and the Earth is cursed.
This is a real judgment on Adam, but it is only typological of the much worse reality that could have befallen him, i.e. of being cast out of God's favour and grace altogether into Hell. Nevertheless it is a pointer to that. Here the loss of divine favour could have been avoided by Adam's perfect obedience. Hence the pre-Fall Covenant, however graciously instituted, is called the Covenant of Works.
The Antedeluvian World could have only been saved by grace through faith, leading to works as evidence of that grace and faith. The cleansing of the World by the Flood pointed to the casting of sinners out of the place of grace into a lost eternity. Only Noah and his family were in the place of safety God had provided for them.
Although there may be quite a strict correspondence between those sinners who drowned and thoise who ended-up in Hell, the type of the Flood as being swept by death out of God's place of favour is typological of the future New Heavens and New Earth being emptied of sinners, who end up in Hell. Besides a few may have believed Noah's message, but too late to get into the Ark (?)
With the people of Israel and the Land of Israel we have another type of the New Covenant and eschataloical reality of God's people, in God's place, doing God's will.
The condition to remaining in the Land is not perfect obedience as it was with Adam, for either individual Israelites or for the Israelites collectively.
Any Israelite who has true faith by grace will be justified before God. This faith will be evidenced by sanctification and good works.
As well as simple and temporary excommunication for certain offences, which involved loss of religious privileges, (partial?) shunning, and exile (?), there were other conditions for both individual Israelites who had true faith, individual Israelites who didn't have true faith, and for those who were strangers in the Land.
If excommunication wasn't carried out by the people, it could be carried out by God Himself imposing a curse. Or in certain circumstances, it seems that simple and temporary excommunication was said to be accompanied by God's curse.
For the most gross, flagrant, and presumptious (wilful) breaches of the 10C, there was no sacrifice available, but hence, the properly convicted individual was to be excommunicated by death without mercy. This would of course apply whether the individual concerned had true faith or not.
In individual cases, none of this meant that individual Israelites were in some kind of Covenant of Works, or in some kind of hybrid Covenant of Grace-Covenant of Works situation, if that were possible.
Nor did it mean that individuals in Israel were personally justified and sanctified by grace through faith, but kept from being cast out of the Land by excommunication in any of the three above levels by works. All it meant was that - just as in the New Covenant- grace and faith are evidenced by behaviour, and church sanctions only kick in when certain conditions have been breached by behaviour that may or may not point to the person's unbelief, so in Israel grace and faith were evidenced by works.
If certain works weren't evidenced church-nation sanctions kicked in at different levels. Some of these sanctions could lead to the restoration of the offender. Others could lead to his/her death. For the believers this excommunication by execution would be an entrance to glory from the typological Promised Land. For the unbelievers it would be an entrance to Hell.
None of this makes the Sinaitic Covenant a hybrid Covenant or Covenant of Works.
Any ability that truly believing Israelites had to keep their Covenantal noses clean was by saving grace. Any ability that "unbelieving" Israelites had to keep their noses clean was by common grace.
The whole Sinaitic system may seem in some ways "less gracious" than the New Covenant system, but it is not a hybrid covenant or CoW, which is impossible. It wasn't really "less gracious" anyway, as it was appropriate to the childhood church.
It was no more less gracious, than a father chastising his younger son with a belt, while his older son doesn't get the belt. Or a father teaching his younger son with picture-books, while his older son is just taught with word-books. It was an appropriate system for that time.
There was no RoCoW there, but the theme of God's people, in God's kingdom, doing God's will, makes further advances at Sinai, and somewhat echoes the Edenic situation, in places.
Sinai was through and through an administration of the Covenant of Grace. The only condition for justification before God was saving faith. There were conditions on what was acceptable behaviour within the Covenant admin, but acceptable behaviour was only ultimately by grace through faith, and the works were evidence of that.
The difference in conditions between the OC and NC can largely be put down to the fact that the NC Church is no longer a child but a rebellious adolescent.
More later..................
In Eden we have Adam and Eve as God's people in God's place doing God's will. When they lose favour with God because of their braking the Covenant of Works, they are cast out of the Garden and the Earth is cursed.
This is a real judgment on Adam, but it is only typological of the much worse reality that could have befallen him, i.e. of being cast out of God's favour and grace altogether into Hell. Nevertheless it is a pointer to that. Here the loss of divine favour could have been avoided by Adam's perfect obedience. Hence the pre-Fall Covenant, however graciously instituted, is called the Covenant of Works.
The Antedeluvian World could have only been saved by grace through faith, leading to works as evidence of that grace and faith. The cleansing of the World by the Flood pointed to the casting of sinners out of the place of grace into a lost eternity. Only Noah and his family were in the place of safety God had provided for them.
Although there may be quite a strict correspondence between those sinners who drowned and thoise who ended-up in Hell, the type of the Flood as being swept by death out of God's place of favour is typological of the future New Heavens and New Earth being emptied of sinners, who end up in Hell. Besides a few may have believed Noah's message, but too late to get into the Ark (?)
With the people of Israel and the Land of Israel we have another type of the New Covenant and eschataloical reality of God's people, in God's place, doing God's will.
The condition to remaining in the Land is not perfect obedience as it was with Adam, for either individual Israelites or for the Israelites collectively.
Any Israelite who has true faith by grace will be justified before God. This faith will be evidenced by sanctification and good works.
As well as simple and temporary excommunication for certain offences, which involved loss of religious privileges, (partial?) shunning, and exile (?), there were other conditions for both individual Israelites who had true faith, individual Israelites who didn't have true faith, and for those who were strangers in the Land.
If excommunication wasn't carried out by the people, it could be carried out by God Himself imposing a curse. Or in certain circumstances, it seems that simple and temporary excommunication was said to be accompanied by God's curse.
For the most gross, flagrant, and presumptious (wilful) breaches of the 10C, there was no sacrifice available, but hence, the properly convicted individual was to be excommunicated by death without mercy. This would of course apply whether the individual concerned had true faith or not.
In individual cases, none of this meant that individual Israelites were in some kind of Covenant of Works, or in some kind of hybrid Covenant of Grace-Covenant of Works situation, if that were possible.
Nor did it mean that individuals in Israel were personally justified and sanctified by grace through faith, but kept from being cast out of the Land by excommunication in any of the three above levels by works. All it meant was that - just as in the New Covenant- grace and faith are evidenced by behaviour, and church sanctions only kick in when certain conditions have been breached by behaviour that may or may not point to the person's unbelief, so in Israel grace and faith were evidenced by works.
If certain works weren't evidenced church-nation sanctions kicked in at different levels. Some of these sanctions could lead to the restoration of the offender. Others could lead to his/her death. For the believers this excommunication by execution would be an entrance to glory from the typological Promised Land. For the unbelievers it would be an entrance to Hell.
None of this makes the Sinaitic Covenant a hybrid Covenant or Covenant of Works.
Any ability that truly believing Israelites had to keep their Covenantal noses clean was by saving grace. Any ability that "unbelieving" Israelites had to keep their noses clean was by common grace.
The whole Sinaitic system may seem in some ways "less gracious" than the New Covenant system, but it is not a hybrid covenant or CoW, which is impossible. It wasn't really "less gracious" anyway, as it was appropriate to the childhood church.
It was no more less gracious, than a father chastising his younger son with a belt, while his older son doesn't get the belt. Or a father teaching his younger son with picture-books, while his older son is just taught with word-books. It was an appropriate system for that time.
There was no RoCoW there, but the theme of God's people, in God's kingdom, doing God's will, makes further advances at Sinai, and somewhat echoes the Edenic situation, in places.
Sinai was through and through an administration of the Covenant of Grace. The only condition for justification before God was saving faith. There were conditions on what was acceptable behaviour within the Covenant admin, but acceptable behaviour was only ultimately by grace through faith, and the works were evidence of that.
The difference in conditions between the OC and NC can largely be put down to the fact that the NC Church is no longer a child but a rebellious adolescent.
More later..................