This is part 2 of the series: I Will Be A God To You And To Your Children. We’re talking about how to read the Scriptures, about what Scripture says about the covenant of grace, its administration, and baptism. One of the . . . Continue reading →
One of the most frequent topics and questions for discussion on the Heidelblog has been this: Who should be baptized and why? To anticipate an objection: some will say that the Heidelcast should not be addressing this subject because it causes needless . . . Continue reading →
In the history of Reformed theology, few volumes have been as important as Johannes Cocceius’ Doctrine of The Covenant and Testament of God (3rd edition, 1660). It appears in English for the first time as volume 3 in the Classic Reformed Theology . . . Continue reading →
Remember our definition of the covenant of works. It was that legal arrangement into which God voluntarily condescended to enter and by which he promised eternal blessedness to Adam, on the condition that Adam by personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience should keep . . . Continue reading →
The doctrine of the covenant of works was taught by the Dutch, the Germans, the French, the Swiss, the English, the Scots, and the Irish. It was taught in the 1560s (it was arguably implied in the 1561 Belgic Confession’s phrase “commandment . . . Continue reading →
This overview is sufficient to show how the older writings can manifest the covenant doctrine in Reformed theology. But, one might perhaps say, that only applies to the covenant of grace. These historical data cannot prove that the covenant of works belonged . . . Continue reading →
For a doctrine that was almost universally held by Reformed theologians from the 1560s through the 19th century, and confessed explicitly twice in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1648), in the Westminster Larger Catechism, in the Savoy Declaration (1658), as well as . . . Continue reading →
The covenant of grace partakes both of a testament and of a covenant. Hence it is not improperly called “a covenant by a testament,” “a testamentary covenant” and a “federal testament.” It is a covenant because after the manner of a covenant . . . Continue reading →
The nature and use of the law (which goes before the covenant of grace) having been unfolded, we must now treat of the covenant itself. Since it is of the greatest importance in theology (being as it were the center and bond . . . Continue reading →
ARGUMENT. V. Though the patrons of the doctrine of the necessity of repentance in order to the obtaining of the pardon of sin, do not aim at any encroachment on the doctrine of free pardon; yet, with all deference to those learned . . . Continue reading →
2. THE PROMISE OF THE COVENANT. The great promise of the covenant of works was the promise of eternal life. They who deny the covenant of works generally base their denial in part on the fact that there is no record of . . . Continue reading →
1. The law of Moses was, in the first place, a re-enactment of the covenant of works. A covenant is simply a promise suspended upon a condition. The covenant of works, therefore, is nothing more than the promise of life suspended on . . . Continue reading →
A difference exists between a furnished and destitute state. The one is of the law considered in itself and its own nature; the other, in relation to us. The law was given to man in the beginning (before the fall) for life . . . Continue reading →
God having thus entered into covenant with our Surety Christ Jesus, was pleased also to enter into covenant with us in him. Now this covenant we define to be, a free and gratuitous agreement between an offended God and offending man, in . . . Continue reading →
Q. What warrant is there, Act. 2. 39. for Infant Baptism? Ans. I shall not contend for the actual baptizing of them at that instant. But every one of you be baptized ἕκαστος father and sons. Why? the promise is to you . . . Continue reading →
Recently I had a question from a reader of the HB asking about John Owen’s view of baptism. It is sometimes implied either that he was a Baptist or became all but Baptist in his covenant theology. This is a puzzling thing . . . Continue reading →
This statement does not rest upon any express declaration of the Scriptures. It is, however, a concise and correct mode of asserting a plain Scriptural fact, namely, that God made to Adam a promise suspended upon a condition, and attached to disobedience . . . Continue reading →
As to his legal relations, the Scriptures clearly teach that, at his creation, he was put under the equitable Covenant of Works for a certain probationary period. This just constitution provided (a) everlasting well-being on condition of perfect obedience, and (b) everlasting . . . Continue reading →
In contemporary Reformed Christianity, even in confessional churches, i.e., those churches where they not only formally hold the historic confessions but where they still profess to believe and seek to practice what we confess, two of the most disposable doctrines seem to . . . Continue reading →
Adam in Hosea 6:7: generic or specific? An example of a different order is the exegesis of Hosea 6:7, where the medieval tradition had rested unquestioningly on the Vulgate rendering, “ipsi autem sicut Adam transgressi sunt pactum.” The text indicated, as virtually . . . Continue reading →