A comment explaining the republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai (yet another quick summing up which is constantly needed to counter the slow)
I find it helpful when trying to understand the republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai (republication *not* reestablishment; the Covenant of Works still being in effect after the Fall though only as a curse for man who is born with original sin) to consider that National Israel was as unique in God’s plan of redemption as pre-fall Adam was unique and as Jesus incarnate is unique.
Individual Israelites were saved by faith in the coming Messiah just as we are saved by faith in the already come Messiah, but *National Israel* itself was a *proto-type* of the coming Messiah. Their history mirrored Jesus’ history. The republication of the Covenant of Works on Sinai was so that it could be seen that Jesus was *born under the law* and fulfilled what the first Adam (Adam in the Garden) failed to fulfill, the Covenant of Works, which was given in elaborated form on Sinai.
There is one way to be saved: works. Either your own (good luck with that) or Jesus’, appropriated by faith in His obedience in life and suffering on the cross.
So the Covenant of Works given on Sinai confuses Christians and theologians who get all wrought up “Salvation is by faith alone!” (as if Thomas Boston, et al, didn’t grasp this) and who get all caught up in trying to see how it applied to the land and obedience to stay in the land, etc., while not seeing the ‘National Israel as type for Jesus aspect of it’. When you see *National* Israel as a type for Jesus Christ, and you see National Israel’s uniqueness in God’s plan, again as unique as pre-fall Adam and Jesus incarnate, it becomes clear. (Their history itself is the very *substance* of the Word of God; while at the same time - it always needs to be stated - *individual* Israelites, to be saved, needed faith in the coming Messiah just as we need to have faith in the already come Messiah.)
The Covenant of Works republished on Sinai was given to National Israel which represented Jesus Christ yet to come. The playing out of all the history that followed was to keep the bloodline from Adam to Christ (the Kingly line) pure (civil laws), to teach of the Messiah through types (the ceremonial laws) and to show (via the moral laws) that fallen man *can’t* follow them, but that the coming Messiah can and will and did follow them.
2 Comments:
[Below is yet *another* summing up of the subject I posted to some blog awhile back, found via google.]
Don't we need to bring the second Adam into this discussion to clear up the confused souls who are so piously denouncing any idea of a republication of the Covenant of Works?
And first of all republication is not synonymous with reestablishment.
Anyway, the Covenant of Works was never nullified. It doesn't even need to be reestablished. It is an ongoing (now) curse. It did need to be republished for the world to see that the second Adam was fulfilling the very law that the first Adam in the garden failed to fulfill.
Leaving out Jesus as second Adam, born under the law, fulfilling the *very law* (the same law Adam in the garden had to fulfill) in His active obedience and then paying the penalty for Adam's failure in His passive obedieance - his death on the cross is leaving out a lot.
Critics of republication need to be reminded *over and over*: there is *one* way to be saved: works. Either your own (good luck with that) or through faith appropriating the work of Jesus Christ.
Also, this needs to be included in these discussions: national Israel was as unique in God's plan of redemption as the first Adam and even as the second Adam. National Israel is a type for the Messiah. It is the bloodline of the Messiah. National Israel is also the very substance (the history) of the Word of God. They were fallen people saved by faith in the coming Messiah just as we are saved by faith in the already come Messiah; yet aside from that they as a player in God's plan are very different from us. As different as pre-fall Adam is different from us. Again, not in terms of them not being fallen, but in terms of their role in God's plan. When the law was given to them on Sinai it was in effect given to the second Adam. Republished. And in an obviously elaborated form.
(As a commenter has said well above national Israel may not be that different from us regarding the land promise, yet still, their uniqueness as the type for the Messiah in God's plan plays a role in why the covenant of works was given to them in particular on Sinai with the stipulations that seem unique, etc.)
Ask yourself: was the second Adam supposed to *not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil*? In essence yes, but practically that command was published in more elaborate form on Sinai for the second Adam to be born under and to fulfill.
There is only one way to be saved: works. Either your own (again, look luck with that) or Jesus', appropriated by faith.
A quick addendum: there are false teachers who need to deny the imputation of Jesus' active obedience, and with this deny that the law given on Sinai is the same as the Covenant of Works. When a person perhaps ignorantly though usually very piously critiques the notion of a republication of the covenant of works on Sinai they are falling into the hands of the false teachers. Know the subject matter, know the battlefield. And think twice before you accuse, in effect, someone like Thomas Boston (and many other names could be mentioned obviously) of being ignorant of classical Covenant - Federal - Theology.
I, of course, post such comments under various fake names, because otherwise the churchians who run these blogs and forums huff and puff and demonstrate their fear of man and desire to be seen as 'good' in the eyes of the men they fear ban me with great, swelling feelings of righteousness.
Post a Comment
<< Home