Samuel Bolton’s Survey Of Opinion On The Mosaic Covenant

My friend and colleague Mike Brown published a revision of his excellent MA (Historical Theology) thesis (Westminster Seminary California) in 2012 as Christ and the Condition: The Covenant Theology of Samuel Petto (1624-1711). As part of the background to explaining Petto, Mike . . . Continue reading →

Heidelcast 50: Making Some Sense Of The Republication Debate Pt 3: With Chris Gordon

Heidelcast

Beginning at least in the 1560s, it was non-controversial for Reformed theologians to teach that God, before the fall, entered into a legal, probationary covenant with Adam, who was the representative of the whole human race, the condition of which was perfect . . . Continue reading →

Heidelcast 48: Making Some Sense Of The Republication Debate Pt 1: History

Heidelcast

Parts of the confessional Reformed world in North America are in the midst of a controversy over whether it is biblical, confessional, and historically Reformed to teach that the Mosaic covenant was, in some sense, a republication of the covenant of works. . . . Continue reading →

Is Republication Really That Confusing?

A pastor writing a Q&A column in a small Canadian religious newspaper answered a question about republication recently by writing “as a general rule, Reformed Christians agree that the Covenant of Works was established at the start with Adam, and with all . . . Continue reading →

More Questions From Ginger: Why Is Republication So Controversial?

As a follow-on to the post on the covenant of works, Ginger asks, You said: “Several have said that their status as a national people and their tenure in the land was affected by their obedience or disobedience. This view, however, has . . . Continue reading →

The Legal Principle In Moses

The Mosaic law itself did not originate the notion of personal obedience de novo, since it recapitulated a more fundamental creational principle of righteousness through obedience to the Creator’s covenant stipulations. Further, the Mosaic law did not introduce a new way of . . . Continue reading →