6 comments

1. Dr. Clark,
   Excellent…superb…thank you for this rich list of resources.
   Unfortunately, this truth gets bucked by folks in our own tradition.
   This proverbial mountain of evidence should slow down the turbos
   that insist that republication is historically anachronistic. Bravo!
   Pastor David Inks

2. Thanks for posting these links in this handy format, Dr Clark. I used to think that republication was a novelty or, at best, a minority report. From reading earlier sources, it is perfectly obvious that it was a widely held position. I do not know if you have read the Westminster divine, Edmund Calamy’s pamphlet on the Two Covenants, but he seemed to reject the idea. More importantly, if you reject republication, you have a very difficult time making sense of whole swathes of scripture, especially Leviticus 18:5; Romans 10, and Galatians 3 and 4. It will be interesting to see what conclusions our friend Harrison Perkins comes to in his forthcoming thesis on James Ussher.

3. Daniel,
   As I understand it, the republication of the covenant of works at Sinai was glorious good news in the light of the Abrahamic covenant, because in the Abrahamic covenant God himself promises unilaterally to fulfil all the obligations and suffer the consequences of our sin, under the covenant of works. The republication of the covenant of works in the Mosaic covenant simply shows us the amazing lengths that God goes to, to perfectly obey and suffer under the covenant of works. “Christ redeemed us from the curse, by becoming a curse for us.” Gal. 3: 13 Therefore Christ says, “Come to me, you that are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you…and you will find rest to your souls.” Matt. 11:28-29 Our obedience, under the republication of the covenant of works that is perfectly fulfilled by God, is obedience under the covenant of grace, as an expression of love and gratitude, as we are gradually being conformed to the image of Christ by the Holy Spirit. Because it was all of works for Christ, it is all of grace for the elect.

   The civil and ceremonial laws were requirements for the nation of Israel, for tenure in the land, and administration of the covenant of grace under types and shadows, but not for justified acceptance with God. They become obsolete with the coming of the One they temporarily represented.

   I think you make an excellent point, an understanding of the Mosaic covenant as a republication of the covenant of works, is essential to our “making sense of whole swaths of scripture.”

   • As I continue to work through these resources and think about the implications of the Mosaic covenant as a republication of the covenant of works, it seems clear that the errors of moralism, particularly covenant moralism stem from a denial of republication of the covenant of works in the Mosaic covenant, and consequently of the the law\grace distinction. It leads to the idea of a conditional covenant of grace, and therefore two stage justification. We see this taught by John Piper as future justification, Norman Shepherd’s salvation by faith and works, aka faithfulness, and Douglas Wilson’s claim that the gospel is the law, and the law is the gospel.

     When you deny that the Adam was under a covenant of works, and maintain that God only deals with man on the basis of grace that has conditions, you cannot say that the Mosaic covenant is a pedagogical republication of the covenant of works to show us our sin and misery by the strictness of God’s demands. You can only say that it was a detailed instruction of the conditions God requires of us, to be accepted by Him at the final judgement. And you have to deny that God requires perfect obedience, so you must lower the standard of law keeping for acceptance with God so that it is doable. You effectively eliminate our need of Christ to fulfill the law, by His perfect righteousness, on our behalf. Then the purpose of Christ’s perfect obedience of the law is only to provide the perfect sacrifice for our sin. That makes salvation to depend on faith in Christ who provides forgiveness of sin, but leaves us on the hook for sufficient obedience of the law for final salvation.

     It really is essential to the Solas of Reformed theology to maintain that the Mosaic covenant is a republication of the covenant of works, as a pedagogical use of the law to drive us back to the Abrahamic covenant which ratifies the promises of God’s unilateral fulfilment of the covenant of works, so that our obedience under the unconditional covenant of grace would be by willingness, rather than out of fear of final judgement, as adopted sons who want to please our gracious Father who has already accepted us through the perfect obedience of our elder brother, imputed to us. In this way the Mosaic covenant is a republication of the covenant of works, for pedagogical purposes, as well as an administration of the covenant of grace.

4. This goes to show us that even in Reformed circles today we are not all there with 16th and 17th Reformed theology. Nevertheless, It’s is one thing to be unaware of our theology, it is another thing to reject because of different reasons.

5. Dr Clark,

   Thanks here from Jerusalem. There is so much confusion now in the United States over these Confessional issues, in large part, because of “theonomy.” The quote from Robert Shaw is decisive.

   Al Hembd
   Jerusalem

Comments are closed.