Covenant Theology: The Foundation

Five years ago, I began a series of sermons on covenant theology. Five years ago, many of you were not part of this congregation. In the past five years, many of our children have grown up to be young adults. Some are married and establishing families of their own. These factors, coupled with what I have learned in speaking to some of you regarding your interaction with Reformed thinking, have led me to the conclusion that it is time to revisit those subjects which I explained in that original sermon series. We are, as I just indicated, a different congregation today. The central significance of covenant theology needs to be explained to some of you and re-emphasized to others.

Here in the Introduction, I will begin by stating why I think a series like this is necessary to a congregation. Then, I will offer a definition of covenant theology. The body of this first sermon will be concerned with what I will call “The Foundation of Covenant Theology.”By this title, I am referring to a basic spiritual truth about our relationship with God upon which everything we know about Him, ourselves and our faith rests.

Why is this sermon series necessary? This series is necessary for two reasons. First, covenant theology is one of the most significant theological formulations in history (I make this declaration without apology and with the belief that all other interpretive schemes are unbiblical.). Second, a large portion of the modern evangelical Church is completely ignorant of covenant theology and, regrettably, has been denied the manifold benefits that come from covenant theology's approach to Scripture. The contemporary Church has been decimated by methods of interpreting Scripture which fail to recognize the unity and continuity of God's single revelation. Many believers think the New Testament has no connection to the Old; they've been taught that “if you can't find a verse for it in the New Testament, it doesn't apply today.”Christians have adopted an approach to the Bible which ignores context and which, consequently, has given us one of the weakest and most timid generations of believers in the history of the Church.

Covenant theology, as we will see in this series, is robust and strong and full of substance. Covenant theology is the theology of the Bible in a systematic presentation. A covenantal approach to Scripture gives us a theology which incorporates every facet of our Christian experience, from our conversion to the daily fulfillment of our duties before God.

Having explained to you the reason for this sermon series, I also must offer at least an introductory definition of covenant theology. I will begin with the question, What is a covenant? A covenant, simply stated, is an agreement between two parties that generally includes stipulations mutually agreed upon by the parties (I'll have more to say about this is a later sermon.). Next, with this definition of a covenant in mind, we must ask: What is covenant theology? Covenant theology is the method of Biblical interpretation which is implied by the nature of Scripture. To put it another way, covenant theology is the hermeneutics which Scripture requires if the Bible is to be properly understood and applied.

By this last statement, I mean that the nature of the revelation we have in Scripture is covenantal; God's revelation in the Bible comes through an unfolding series of covenants (such as, His covenant with Adam in the Garden of Eden, His covenant with Abraham, His covenant with Moses and His covenant with Jesus Christ). Any proper interpretation of God's revelation, therefore, must reflect the nature of that revelation. Covenant theology is, as I said a moment ago, nothing less than the systematic arrangement of Biblical theology.

After today's sermon on the Foundation of Covenant Theology, I will cover the following topics in the coming weeks:

Covenant theology has a long and admirable history, as I indicated. The names of Zwingli, Bullinger, Ursinus and, of course, Calvin, are just a few of the many associated with the development of covenant theology. In was in the Westminster Standards, however, that covenant theology was given confessional status. By this I mean that in the Westminster Standards, the Church declared and illustrated that a covenant approach to interpreting the Bible was the correct approach. At the time of the Westminster Assembly, Protestantism spoke with one voice and that voice is heard in the Standards. The loss of our Protestant heritage has given us a theologically anemic Church. Most evangelicals don't even know that the Westminster Standards were what the Church of Christ believed and confessed at the time of the Reformation.

Before I begin this exploration of covenant theology, I want to acquaint you with what I believe is the key to understanding this system. In the Westminster Confession, chapter VII, paragraph I, we read:

The distance between God and the creature is go great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which He has been pleased to express by way of covenant.

This paragraph represents the foundation for what is known as covenant theology. The writers begin with the presupposition that God, the Creator, and man, the creature, are separated; they are separated not by measurable distance, but by a moral chasm opened in the Garden of Eden when Adam, our father, disobeyed God and brought a sweeping corruption to the soul of man which left him unable and unwilling to have communion with God. Man was lost; he was a blind, senseless prisoner of darkness destined for wrath because of his rebellion against his Creator. Due to the seriousness of the blow suffered by man in Eden, he would have remained in that state forever had it not been for God's voluntary condescension. It is this voluntary condescension on God's part, His willingness to come to man when man could not and would not come to Him, that is expressed in the Bible through a series of covenants.

The key to understanding covenant theology, then, is the knowledge represented in this paragraph from the Confession. The key to understanding the Bible is this notion of God coming to man. When this is grasped, when we realize that apart from God's willingness to come to us and reveal Himself to us and provide for our salvation, we would be a prisoner of sin forever, then we have taken the first step in rightly comprehending the teaching of the Bible from Genesis through the Revelation. With such a perspective, we stand in awe of God and we are humbled by what He has done. With such a perspective we realize that everything we know and everything we have and everything we shall enjoy is a matter of grace. That is what God's coming to fallen man is-it is grace. If covenant theology teaches us anything, it is that we are saved and kept by grace.

There is one passage in the Bible that, perhaps more than any other, beautifully portrays all of the essential elements of covenant theology. That passage is Isaiah 6. This is the chapter which I am going to use to confirm the basic truths of covenant theology presented thus far. Isaiah 6 emphasizes the utter purity of God and, by way of contrast, the utter depravity of man; this chapter also shows that the only solution to man's dilemma is God's willingness to provide for man's restoration, not as payment of what is due, not in response to desire or effort, by as a matter of grace.

6:1 In the year of King Uzziah's death I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple. 2 Seraphim stood above Him, each having six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called out to another and said, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory.”4 And the foundations of the thresholds trembled at the voice of him who called out, while the temple was filling with smoke.

The first element in this passage is one which dates Isaiah's vision. He says, “In the year of King Uzziah's death, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne...”The year of the king's death cannot be determined precisely, but falls somewhere between 748 and 734 BC. During Uzziah's reign, Judah enjoyed prosperity and peace with the northern kingdom of Israel; but moral decay was increasingly evident. After the death of the king, the moral decline of Judah intensified; as a matter of fact, the nation never again would know the measure of strength that characterized the tenure of Uzziah.

The vision of Isaiah recorded in this sixth chapter amounts to a call to the ministry. Isaiah would be God's prophet during those dark days of Judah's moral decline. What Isaiah witnessed in this vision was the manifestation of the glory of God; it was an experience that left him shaken, yet prepared to commence his labors among the wayward people. This experience corrected Isaiah's perception of God, himself and the people around him. When this vision subsided, Isaiah was a changed man; he was a man with understanding, a man with a proper view of the world and his place in it. What Isaiah saw had the most profound impact upon him.

What did Isaiah see? Notice his grand description: “I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple.”(v. 1) Every element of this vision is intended to impress upon Isaiah the glory, power and majesty of God. Everything that Isaiah says underscores God's stunning beauty and frightening presence. Isaiah saw the Lord sitting on a throne, the resting place of a king and judge, the seat of one possessing undisputed authority. Further, Isaiah says the Lord was “lofty and exalted.”These terms speak both of the Lord's actual physical elevation above Isaiah and of a figurative elevation, that is, a splendid eminence or glory. And in Isaiah's vision, the flowing train of God's robe filled the room.

What is described is a scene absolutely dominated by the presence of God. His magnificent presence is the focal point of the vision and Isaiah's recollection of it. The splendor of the Lord overwhelmed Isaiah and made it impossible for anything else to get even a split second of his attention. You can imagine Isaiah stepping backwards or shielding his eyes or gasping for breath as he tries to take in what is before him. He is stunned and amazed and frightened and, as he soon confesses, ready to die.

The description continues with the mention of seraphim, which means “burning ones.”(v. 2) These are heavenly attendants mentioned only in this passage in the Old Testament. Their sole duty is to surround the Lord and speak His praise. In humility, these creatures cover their face and feet with their wings. The fact that these servants, who remain in the presence of the Lord day and night ready to do His will, would cover their faces and feet in God's presence further emphasizes the unbearable purity of the Lord; even these creatures who exist for the express purpose of serving God cannot look upon His glory with unshielded eyes. What an amazing event this is, therefore, when we consider that Isaiah, a mere man, was allowed to witness this scene.

As these creatures wait upon the Lord, they cry out to one another: “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts, The whole earth is full of His glory.”(v. 3) The repeated word, “holy,”is the Hebrew term qadash which refers to the divine perfections which separate the Creator from the creature. Here are some definitions for this word which are found in various Hebrew lexicons: “hallowed, holy, sanctified, to consecrate, to be separate, to be apart.”You get the idea. God is here identified as the completely separated One, as the One without equal, as the One infinitely unique in character. The words of the seraphim are not only a declaration of God's majesty and moral perfection, but also an equally significant pronouncement concerning the character of those who may be allowed to have communion with Him. The chant of the seraphim forbids all creatures who are unholy from approaching God.

The glory of God incorporated in the declaration of the seraphim is extended to the work of God's hands: “The whole earth,”they proclaim, “is full of His glory.”The phrase means that the works of God's hands reflect His attributes; they are testimonies to His power, wisdom and beauty. Isaiah adds that at the sound of this declaration regarding God and His creation, “the foundations of the thresholds trembled... while the temple was filling with smoke.”(v. 4) The proclamation of God's majesty is almost too much for creation to bear; in his vision, the place where Isaiah stood reverberated with the words of the seraphim and smoke, which signaled God's presence, added to the sacredness of this scene. Isaiah stood in the presence of God and, to this point, uttered not a word.

There is a question pleading to be answered. Why did Isaiah see this magnificent vision of God? In answering this question, I find myself describing, once again, the heart of covenant theology. Isaiah viewed the majesty of God only because God chose to reveal Himself to this man. There was nothing in Isaiah that commended him to God, nothing for which God was bound to give this man the privilege described in this chapter. Isaiah's reaction to what he saw, recorded in v. 5, shows that the vision was not a reward for personal merit or payment for a task well done. God sovereignly chose Isaiah as one who would be commissioned to deliver a message of repentance and hope to a wandering people. Isaiah's experience is the experience of every believer. God came to him in his impoverished state and, in the face of this magnificent display of God's holiness, Isaiah could do nothing but what he did do, which was to confess his depravity.

What did Isaiah have to say in response to this glimpse of God's glory? What was the first thing that came to his mind as he stood before the Lord of hosts and heard the seraphim chanting their solemn song: “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Hosts”? Isaiah said: “Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.”Isaiah's response is fascinating. This display of God's glory instantly revealed Isaiah's sinful condition. His cry, “Woe is me, for I am ruined,”is a cry of absolute despair; it is a passionate wail of grief. There was a direct correlation between the revelation of the magnificent holiness of God, the Creator, and the revelation of the atrocious depravity of Isaiah, the creature. In the light of God's purity, Isaiah's condition became obvious. This underscores even more the incredible character of this event as Isaiah, the sinner, is allowed to gaze upon the glory and majesty of God.

The prophet declared, “I am ruined.”The word Isaiah uses (dama) is translated in the following ways: “to cut off,”“to cease,”“to perish,”“to bring to silence,”“to destroy,”“to be undone”and “to cut down.”I've included an extended list of translations to demonstrate the intensity of this word and, therefore, the intensity of Isaiah's conclusion about himself as he beheld this vision of God. Isaiah realized that there was nothing good in him; he realized, in the brilliant light of God's glory, that everything about him, every part of him, was corrupted by sin. The depth of his corruption could only have been revealed by such an encounter with the unqualified holiness of God. This is not how Isaiah thought of himself before he had this vision. Here, he indicates his expectation of instant death because his true character is revealed in the presence of pure holiness.

We should not suppose that this vision necessarily represents Isaiah's conversion; what is represented is a revelation to the prophet of the true extent of his own sin; and this is done in preparation, as we will see, for a particular ministry. Whatever Isaiah believed about himself before this vision was shattered by the shocking disclosure of his depravity, a disclosure necessitated by God's perfection. Sin is shown for what it is, it is revealed in all of its evil infamy when confronted by the Lord's glory.

Isaiah expresses his realization of his own depravity in the words, “For I am a man of unclean lips.”Isaiah listened as the seraphim praised God in unbroken flow, but he could not join them; he could not echo their words of praise. He could not join the chorus of the seraphim because no suitable expression regarding God's character could from his mouth; his mouth was stopped by the revelation of his sin. This is what Isaiah realized at that moment; this is why he cries, “Woe is me, for I am ruined!”He could not praise God because he was suddenly made aware of his sin and, therefore, made aware like never before in his life of his unworthiness to have contact with the Creator. Yet, here he is, in the presence of God-but only because God initiated this encounter.

There was more to be said. Isaiah realized that all those with whom he lived were likewise hindered by their depravity: “I live among a people of unclean lips.”To come to understand his own depravity was horrifying enough, but, in the process, Isaiah came to know that the whole nation was unfit. Sin separated Isaiah from God and sin separated all of Isaiah's fellow-countrymen from God. And, I would add, the implications of Isaiah's words go beyond that one nation. Isaiah's glimpse of God's glory gave him an instantaneous perspective on the state of fallen man. The doctrine of human depravity smothered Isaiah and all he could do was gasp “we're all the same.”Isaiah was simply one of many and what he experiencedthe dread, fear and shockindicated what was the condition of the whole human race.

Finally, Isaiah adds, “For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.”Surely Isaiah anticipated death. The trauma of this vision was such that he could not expect to live. If even the sinless seraphim covered their faces in the presence of God, what would become of such a one as Isaiah? Before this question is answered, I want you to notice that Isaiah refers to the Lord as “the King.”This is a certain recognition of God's covenant relation to Israel. The nation had one King; they were obligated to one King by virtue of the covenant promises made to Abraham. So Isaiah's vision is within the context of God, the covenant King of the nation, coming to bring charges of covenant unfaithfulness on the part of Israel.

What happened to Isaiah? What happened to Isaiah is, as I pointed out earlier, a picture of covenant theology. Remember that statement from our Confession:

We have in this scene a holy God, lofty and exalted, who is being praised by mysterious creatures, creatures which repeat over and over the attribute which distinguishes God from all else; and we have Isaiah, a man whose true sinful condition has just been made known to him. Far from even thinking of reaching out for God, Isaiah is overwhelmed, grief-stricken and terror-stricken by the revelation of his depravity and his unfitness to serve in the light of God's glory. There was no movement of Isaiah toward God, no movement in thought or step. But, I say again, what happened next is a wonderful illustration of the concept behind covenant theology.

As Isaiah continued contemplating the scene before him, “One of the seraphim flew to me,”he says, “with a burning coal in his hand which he had taken from the altar with tongs. And he touched my mouth with it and said, 'Behold, this has touched your lips; and your iniquity is taken away, and your sin is forgiven.'”Listen again: “Yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's partâ€¦”The God who was lofty and exalted, the God whose mere presence was the undoing of Isaiah, dispatched a servant who came to Isaiah and announced his forgiveness. God comes to the sinner and announces the sinner's pardon. Isaiah could still be standing in that Temple trembling and worrying and weeping had God waited on him to do something to change their relationship. But that is not what happened. God lowered Himself, as it were, to poor Isaiah.

Isaiah's experience illustrates a theological theme that runs through the Bible; his experience is the message of God's word. Sinful, helpless and hopeless man is forgiven, restored and made useful by God. This is the message of covenant theology. All that we believe and practice is grounded in the reality and recognition of God's condescension to fallen man. Isaiah serves as a picture of what God has done for the human race in Christ Jesus. When confronted by God's holy character, Isaiah's miserable character was immediately manifest and he was driven to despair. But that holy God comes to Isaiah and, in spite of the man's sin, establishes a relationship with him in which Isaiah becomes a servant of the Most High.

The rest of the chapter speaks of Isaiah's ministry to the wayward people of God. The verses teach that Isaiah was sent by God with a particular message, a message of judgment and a message of hope (vv. 8-13). Isaiah now understood like no one else why judgment would come and why hope was such a precious gift from God.

Before we move to our application, I want to take a moment to re-emphasize the basic teaching of this passage; it is a teaching that will guide us during this series on covenant theology. This chapter portrays a holy God and an unholy man; it shows this holy God coming to the aid of this unholy man who had no hope within himself. The restoration of the unholy man was all of God's going; He initiated it and He carried it through. The unholy man, now restored by a merciful and holy God, could render only glad service to the One who had given him life for death. This is, as I stated, what covenant theology is all about; it is about studying the Scriptures according to how the Scriptures are given to us and according to what the Scriptures declare. Isaiah's vision is a brief example of what the Bible declares to us from Genesis through Revelation.

In our application, I want to make a couple of points that are related to the study on covenant theology that we have undertaken. First, I want to call attention to the image of God described in Isaiah's vision. If we are going to interpret and apply properly the teaching of Scripture, if we are going to understand and fulfill our duties in our respective, we must begin with the knowledge of God's absolute holiness. It is this fact which necessitates the reverence and obedience of man in his relationship with his Creator. Any system of theology that fails to exalt God and fails to present Him just as He appears in Isaiah's vision is a faulty system. One of the many, and perhaps most significant, problems in the evangelical Church today is that we do not have such a view of God. Therefore, we do not feel the weight of responsibility that we should as creatures bound to serve and please God.

We have, in our day, allowed unbiblical views of God to influence our thinking and when we have an unbiblical view of God, our entire system of theology is untrustworthy. In all of our relationships, in all of our various positions in life, our responsibilities are defined by God and the degree to which we take those responsibilities seriously depends on what we think about God. If we view God as anything less than how He appears in Isaiah's vision, then we won't feel bound to keep His word and we won't feel bound to honor Him with every day that He gives us and in every relationship we have.

This, again, is what has happened to the modern Church. The holiness of God is not a topic we speak of, it is not a topic that we study. We spend much more time talking and studying ourselves, our needs, our desires, our comfort. Consequently, we can yearn for revival all we want, we can bemoan the sad state of our culture all day long, we can cry about our families disintegrating, but until we have the words of the seraphim echoing in our hearts, over and over again, we will know nothing but continued decline. Until our souls reverberate with the chant, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts,”we will continue to take sin lightly, we will continue to take our duties lightly and the Church will continue to be a pale imitation of that glorious image given in the Scripture.

Covenant theology begins with the exalted and holy character of God and proceeds from that starting point to interpret and apply Scripture. In covenant theology, the holiness of God dominates our thinking and determines our understanding of our place before God. In covenant theology, we don't view ourselves as God's equals, we don't view God as existing to serve us, we don't view His word as a list of suggestions-and this is all because we being with His holy character in this system of theology.

In covenant theology, we see this holy and pure God condescending to fallen man and we see fallen man bound to be grateful and obedient toward this merciful Creator who has loved him in spite of his sin. As we will discover in the coming weeks, this is the approach to Scripture that Scripture itself demands. In covenant theology, we are constantly faced with the holiness of God and its implications for us as redeemed human beings. In this system of Biblical interpretation, we ask questions about our responsibilities in light of God's purity. And, let me assure you, this approach to studying the Bible leaves us just where we should beat the feet of our Creator, praising Him and asking, “What is Your will, O Lord?”

This is a far cry from the posture assumed by many of God's people today. Too many of us know nothing of Isaiah's fear and astonishment; too many of us think we can stroll into God's presence, have a look around, and then stroll out. If this is what you think, if this is even close to what you think, then go back and read Isaiah chapter six again and again until you find yourself able to share in Isaiah's fear. When you reach that point, then you are ready to serve God.

I asked the question, “Why did Isaiah see this magnificent vision of God?”I answered, “Only because God chose to reveal Himself to this man.”Let's get this fact through our heads once and for all: God owes us nothing! God is not bound to help us, He is not bound to save us, He is not bound to preserve us. God does not exist to serve mankind. The Bible nowhere presents God as being under obligation to man, but it everywhere presents man as being under obligation to God. Covenant theology maintains the distinction between God, the Creator, and man, the creature. This system of theology keeps us in our place so that we relate rightly to God, it teaches us that we are to serve God with our whole being, and with our money and with our time and with our plans. This system of theology teaches, as does the Bible, that God, while under no obligation to save fallen man, loved fallen man in Christ. It teaches that He showed mercy to us even after we disregarded His word and rebelled against Him. Love that is shown when there is no obligation to love is real love. Mercy that comes when there is no obligation to show mercy is true mercy.

This is what Isaiah experienced and this is what we have received from Godunmerited love and mercy in Jesus Christ. You can hardly read a chapter in the Bible without being confronted with the fact of God's merciful condescension to helpless man. And the man who approaches God with this knowledge, the man who contemplates his duties with the knowledge of the unmerited grace of God in Christ, is a man who will love God, a man who will serve God, a man who will be forever grateful for what he has received.

These thoughts disturb some modern Christians because some have been taught to believe that God is something other than a sovereign, independent, unchanging Creator. Some have been taught to believe that God somehow owed them salvation; some have even been taught that they cooperate with God in their salvation. What they have not been taught is what is so plainly obvious in Isaiah's reaction to his glimpse of God's glory. They have not been taught about their sin. There are some, I am sorry to say, who believe that having an experience like Isaiah would be an enjoyable thing. There are some who don't understand why Isaiah cried, “Woe is me, for I am ruined!”

How did Isaiah react in the presence of God? Isaiah's sinful imperfection was so obvious in the presence of God that he could do nothing but confess it. He could not stand there and admire God's beauty, he could not stand there and think of all the questions he had always wanted to ask God (which is what some people think we're going to do in heaven). On the contrary, Isaiah no doubt wanted a place to hide from God's purity because it was too much for him to bear. This is what such an encounter should do to a sinful man. Covenant theology presents the teaching of Scripture in such a way that we are constantly brought back to the fundamental point of God's condescension to fallen man so that we are repeatedly made aware of just what God has done for us and just what, therefore, we owe to God. And, I repeat, this is exactly what Scripture does.

The contemplation of God's character is not a cause for celebration until we first let His character expose our sinfulness. When we measure ourselves by God's standard of perfection, we have a true picture of who we are and we have a true understanding of how magnificent is our salvation in Christ. Before we can expect to understand and perform our duties as Christians rightly, we need to have an experience similar to Isaiah's. We need to stand before God, as it were, and let His incredible holiness reveal every last imperfection in us. Only after we have a true understanding of our fallen nature, only after we have reached the point where our sin forces us to cry, “Woe is me, for I am ruined!”, will we be ready to get on with the business of serving God.

I mentioned that whatever Isaiah believed about himself before his vision was shattered by the shocking disclosure of his depravity. It's clear that prior to this vision, Isaiah did not have a proper understanding of his own sin in relation to God's holiness. Otherwise, he would not have reacted as he did. It is an easy thing to go through life thinking that, yes we are sinners, but we're not all that bad. We can do this as long as we never have an Isaiah-like experience. As long as we don't measure ourselves by a perfect standard, of course we are going to look pretty good. But when we get even a glimpse of God's character, as did Isaiah, suddenly our whole world crumbles; it crumbles because it has been built upon false assumptions.

If we are not careful, we will build our world upon a false assumption about our sin; we won't see it for what it really is. And, when we do this, we naturally allow this viewpoint to influence our behavior. Consequently, what should be absolute duty becomes flexible and what should be definitely “yes”or definitely “no”becomes “maybe.”

Covenant theology interprets and applies Scripture from Isaiah's perspective, a perspective where our sin is obvious and undeniable, but also a perspective where God's incredible grace in Christ is equally obvious and undeniable. Covenant theology, by being grounded in the distinction between God and man, as illustrated by Isaiah's vision, maintains duty as duty and it maintains God's word as truth instead of advice. Covenant theology, because it is nothing less than Biblical theology systematized, tells us how to relate rightly to God; it tells us how to view Him, how to worship Him and how to serve Him. Covenant theology explains what our duties are and shows us why and how we must fill those roles.

If covenant theology teaches us anything, it is that we are saved and kept by grace.

The Pastor here has not said anything to prove that non-Covenantal systems, i.e. Dispensationalism, teaches something different than the above.

The same can be said of Dispensationalism.

Dispensationalists also teach that God is sovereign, independent, unchanging, and that He owes Mankind nothing. I also don’t think you will find too many Dispensationalists teaching that Man cooperates with God.

Lewis Sperry Chafer wrote this in an article:

Unlike His wisdom, power, and glory, which could be manifested in creation, the grace of God could be manifested only as there were fallen beings toward whom He could be gracious. It is difficult to believe that the exercise of this so essential part of His nature would be suppressed forever, or that, when it is expressed, it would not be on a plane as perfect and as worthy of Himself as are all His works. In verses 4 and 5 of the context of Ephesians 2:1–10 , which context is the central passage of the Bible on divine grace, three closely related words appear- mercy , love , and grace. A distinction is here indicated: Love is the affection or compassion of God for sinners; mercy is that in Him which devised and provided a redemption through the death of His Son; while grace, in its outworking, is that which God is free to do on the ground of that death. God might love sinners with an unutterable compassion and yet, because of the demands of outraged justice and holiness, be precluded from rescuing them from their righteous doom. The essential revelation contained in the gospel of our salvation is this fact that God is now free within Himself to act in grace toward sinners through the death of Christ for them. Since no other freedom to act in behalf of sinners has been secured, it is to be concluded that all God has ever done or will do for sinful men is wrought on the sole basis of Christ’s death. Even though Christ has died and God is thus free to act in grace, the question as to whether He does little or much for men will be determined only according to His sovereign purpose. This freedom He will always exercise as He has exercised it in past ages.

It is nice that Covenant Theology teaches these things, but it is not the only system that teaches them.

Over the course of the next few weeks I hope to post each of Dr. Bordwine's sermons on Covenant Theology.

That may not be such a good idea. Since they are sermons, intended to strengthen the faith (in Covenant Theology) of people who have already accepted that theology, they seem to lack the logical rigor necessary to convince outsiders.

The Christians here on FR may not agree with everything contained in these posts, but I believe that there are some serious failings in the modern church that need to be addressed, the biggest of which seems to be a lack of understanding of the nature of God.

"... [T]hat there are some serious failings in the modern church that need to be addressed..." is undeniable. Also, there is a widespread "... lack of understanding of the nature of God." However, (in my opinion) the problem is much more serious than "the nature of God." At the very least, we have ungodly people who have intentionally infiltrated the governing bodies and seminaries of the various denominations, with the obvious intention of destroying the faith and morals of the members.

These people will not hear these sermons, at least, not without laughing. They will only be heard by those who (most likely) agree with you, "in essentials." This brings up a point which I find, not only in this particular article, but generally in these discussions of Calvinism:

Calvinists on FR give the impression [that is, they seem or appear to be saying] that they believe that EVERYONE (except Calvinists) belongs to that category of people who believe that

1. God is NOT sovereign.

2. We can justify ourselves, and thus,

3. "force" God to give us salvation.

4. Satan is equal to and can conquer God.

5. WE are equal to God.

While there probably are such people, lurking here on FR, I have not (yet) seen one of them post to a "Calvinism" thread. While this sermon was not this explicit, it is right next to it. People become angry when they are flatly accused of believing things which they would not ever think of believing.

Probably, similar false beliefs have been attributed to Calvinists. If so, THAT was and is just as evil as the converse.

Hopefully, these sermons will generate some good discussion. Remember the words of Augustine: "In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, love."

Agreed. Maybe we should look for more things upon which we can agree, instead of things about which to fight.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.