The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum The Unity of the Covenant of Grace (for mikew)

In reply to:

---

[color:"blue"]My other concern is swinging too far in the opposite direction (which is the very scenario that has prompted these men to propose a new paradigm) by denying that the external administration of the covenant means anything, and that the only two categories of any relevance to our discussion are elect and reprobate. It seems to me that the external administration of the covenant places a reprobate person in a different category before God than someone who may have even had the same "light" but was never incorporated into the covenant community. I don't know if it is appropriate to call this "in" covenant with God as you asked me, but it seems to me that we should identify this categorical distinction somehow. I think the way in which "covenant" itself is conceived or defined plays an important part in the answer. I look forward to your thoughts on this brother.

---

I hope you don't mind me jumping in here at this point, but I thought perhaps I would reply as one who you would probably consider to be in that category of the Auburnites might consider me to have "swung too far in the opposite direction. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]

In Scripture, I find that it is GOD alone who establishes covenant(s) with men. I can't seem to find any place where man has initiated a proposal or established a covenant with God. Man is always the recipient of God's covenant. Further, God not only originates a covenant, but He also establishes the prerequisites, benefits, etc. of that covenant as well as to whom the recipients will be. In the current context, the issue is the "covenant of grace", or to put it simply, salvation. That covenant originated in the Godhead and was established with a special people, whom the Scriptures call the "elect". Throughout biblical history, certain individuals have been set apart as paradigms to represent and illustrate the entire community of people who would be incorporated into this covenant and be reconciled to God in Christ, aka: the Church.

The Scriptures also set forth that this "church" has both an invisible reality and a visible reality; the difference being that the invisible church includes all who are predestined to eternal life and the visible church also includes some who by outward appearance presume to be included with those who are reconciled to God. However, the Covenant is never established with false professors but only true believers who have been regenerated by grace. Until an individual, infant or adult has been regenerated and united to Christ, that individual is said to be under the wrath of God, i.e., not in covenant with God experientially, even those who are elect. Thus it is impossible that there can be any difference relationally to God between a pagan/heathen who never darkens the door of a church and one who has made a false profession of faith, been baptized, taken of the Lord's supper, been ordained to the ministry, etc., etc.. Although, I must qualify that and say that the latter is certainly considered differently by God in that such an individual will be subject to a greater punishment than the former. In short, the latter is under greater judgment; a negative relationship, than the former. It seems to me that the Auburnites and all the various degrees of this "covenantalism" want to teach the opposite. This teaching says that the reprobate are in fact contracted with God "covenantally", joined with Christ, have been given manifold blessings, etc., all which are shared with the elect, LESS the "blessing/gift of perseverance". Further, if a "covenanted reprobate" (an oxymoron if there ever was one) should fall away after a time, the person is called a "covenant breaker". But again, it must first be established that a reprobate can be and does enter into the "covenant of grace" with God through Christ before the term "covenant breaker" can be applied.

If it is said that the reprobate has no part in the covenant of grace, and yet it is possible to be a "covenant breaker", then what covenant is it that the reprobate violates? Does the Scripture teach explicitly that there is another covenant established between God and man which is not salvific and within which one is joined through Christ?

It is my contention that the term "covenant" has been imposed upon certain relational situations and then expanded to include all sorts of "deductive" things where the Bible is silent. In short, I would classify this attempt as being what Christ deemed, "the doctrines of men". In the attempt to introduce these erroneous ideas, the foundational doctrines, e.g., Unconditional Election, Definite Atonement, Perseverance of the Saints and Sola Fide are diminished and/or contradicted.

In His Grace,