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 →
covenant of works
Turretin On Covenant And Testament
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 →
Heidelcast 102: Recovering The Covenant Of Works (2)
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 →
Vos: Whoever Has Historical Sense Can See The Covenant Of Works In The Earlier Reformed Writers
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 →
Heidelcast 103: Recovering The Covenant Of Works (3)
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 →
Heidelcast 104: Recovering The Covenant Of Works (4)
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 →
Usher: The Covenant Of Works Is The Sum Of The Law
How hath the Moral Law been delivered since the Fall? The Sum thereof was comprised in ten Words, (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13.) commonly called the Decalogue or Ten Commandments; solemnly published and engraved in Table of Stone by God himself, (Deut. 4:14 . . . Continue reading →
Calvin: Leviticus 18:5 Is Law Not Gospel
But let us leave the philosophers aside. The law itself, which contains the most perfect rule of life, could not, as we said, confer righteousness. Not that there was anything lacking in the law; Moses declared that he set before the people . . . Continue reading →
Sibbes: Leviticus 18:5 Is A Covenant Of Works
Quest. Now, whence comes this rootedness and firm stability of God’s children? Ans. Especially from this, that they are now in the covenant of grace, rooted in Christ, who is God-man, in whom they are firmly rooted. In Adam we had a . . . Continue reading →
Witsius: In Leviticus 18:5 Moses Repeated The Covenant Of Works
The same doctrine Moses repeated in his ministry. For he also inculcated the same precepts upon which the covenant of works had been built: he both repeated the same solemn saying, He who doeth these things shall live in them, Lev. 18:5 . . . Continue reading →
Owen: Leviticus 18:5 Is Nothing But A Revival Of The Covenant Of Works
1. This covenant, called “the old covenant,” was never intended to be of itself the absolute rule and law of life and salvation unto the church, but was made with a particular design, and with respect unto particular ends. This the apostle . . . Continue reading →
Turretin: Leviticus 18:5 Is Clear Proof Of The Covenant Of Works
VII. Second, a law was imposed upon Adam, which necessarily implies a federal agreement and contract. For he who receives it, binds himself officially to obedience under the punishment denounced through the same; he who gives it (for the very reason that . . . Continue reading →
Turretin: Leviticus 18:5 Is Proof That God Promised Eternal Blessedness To Adam
III. However, the received opinion among the orthodox is that the promise given to Adam was not only of a happy life to be continued in paradise, but of a heavenly and eternal life (to which he was to be carried after . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (1)
First Question What was the liberty of Adam in his state of innocence? I. Since man can be viewed in a fourfold state—the instituted (instituto) of nature, the destitute (destituto) of sin, the restored (restituto) of grace and the appointed (praestituto) of . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (2)
II. By the state of innocence, we mean the first condition of man created after the image of God in internal goodness and external happiness. As it abounded in all goods (of the body as well as of the soul) necessary for . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (3)
IV. Liberty is fourfold: (1) the liberty of independence which belongs to God as the first being; this is opposed to the necessity of dependence which belongs to all creatures. (2) Liberty from coaction by which man acts spontaneously and with freedom; . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (4)
VI. The liberty of Adam was not the liberty of independence (as if he was irresponsible [anypeuthynos] and absolutely his own master) because he ought always to be in subjection (as a creature to his Creator, as a second cause to the . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (5)
VII. However, although he was free from the slavery of sin (because created just and upright) still he was not free from mutability (because whatever his holiness and righteousness, he was mutable, from which in consequence he could fall). Adam was placed . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (6)
IX. Although natural liberty agrees in essentials with the liberty of man constituted in other states, still it differs greatly in accidentals. For the liberty of glory in blessedness is not to be able to sin (non posse peccare). The liberty of . . . Continue reading →
Turretin On The Covenant Of Nature (7)
Second Question Did Adam have the power to believe in Christ? I. This question lies between us and the Arminians who, to defend their hypothesis concerning the necessity of a certain universal sufficient grace, have introduced this opinion—that Adam never had the . . . Continue reading →