Sect. 3. — The Law, as the Covenant of Works, added to the Promise.
Sect. 3. — The Law, as the Covenant of Works, added to the Promise.
Ant. But were the Ten Commandments, as they were delivered to them on Mount Sinai, the Covenant of Works or not?
Evan. They were delivered to them as the Covenant of Works.
Nom. But, by your favour, sir, you know that these people were the posterity of Abraham, and therefore were under that Covenant of Grace which God made with their father. Therefore I do not think they were delivered to them as the Covenant of Works; for you know the Lord never delivers the Covenant of Works to any who are under the Covenant of Grace.
Evan. Indeed it is true, the Lord did manifest so much love to the body of this nation, that all the natural seed of Abraham were externally, and by profession, under the Covenant of Grace made with their father Abraham — though it is to be feared that many of them were still under the Covenant of Works made with their father Adam.
Nom. But sir, you know that in the preface to the Ten Commandments, the Lord calls himself by the name of their God in general; therefore it would seem they were all the people of God.
Evan. That is not to the purpose; for many wicked and ungodly men, being in the visible church and under the external covenant, are called the chosen of God and the people of God, even though they are not so. In like manner, many of these Israelites were called the people of God, even though indeed they were not so.
Nom. But, sir, was the same Covenant of Works made with them that was made with Adam?
Evan. For the general substance of the duty, the law delivered on Mount Sinai, and formerly engraven on man’s heart, was one and the same law; so that at Mount Sinai, the Lord delivered nothing new — only it came more gently to Adam before his fall; but after his fall it came with thunder.
Nom. Yes sir, but as you said yourself, the Ten Commandments, as they were written in Adam’s heart, were but the matter of the Covenant of Works, and not the covenant itself, till the form was annexed to them — that is to say, till God and man were agreed on it. Now, we do not find that God and these people agreed upon any such terms at Mount Sinai.
Evan. Indeed; do you say so? Do you not remember that the Lord consented and agreed, when he said in Lev. 18.5, “You shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which if a man does, he shall live in them;” and in Deu. 27.26, when he said, “Cursed is he that does not confirm all the words of this law, to do them?” And do you not remember that the people consented and agreed when they said, Exo. 19.8, “All that the Lord has spoken, we will do?” And does not the apostle Paul give evidence that these words were the form of the Covenant of Works, when he says in Rom. 10.5, “Moses describes that righteousness which is of the law, that the man who does these things shall live in them;” and when he says in Gal. 3.10, “For it is written, Cursed is everyone that does not continue to do all things written in the book of the law?” And in Deu. 4.13, Moses expressly calls it a covenant saying, “And he declared his covenant to you, which he commanded you to perform, even the Ten Commandments; and he wrote them on tablets of stone.” Now, this was not the Covenant of Grace; for speaking of this covenant afterwards in Deu. 5.3, Moses says, “God did not make this covenant with your fathers, but with you;” and by “fathers” may be meant (says Mr. Ainsworth) all the patriarchs back to Adam who had the promise of the covenant of Christ. Therefore, if it had been the Covenant of Grace, he would have said, God did make this covenant with them, rather than he did not.
Nom. And do any of our godly and modern writers agree with you on this point?
Evan. Yes, indeed. Polonus says, “The Covenant of Works is that in which God promises everlasting life to a man who in all respects performs perfect obedience to the Law of Works, adding to it threatenings of eternal death if he does not perform perfect obedience to it. God made this covenant in the beginning with the first man Adam, while he was in the first estate of integrity. God repeated and made the same covenant again by Moses with the people of Israel.” And Dr. Preston, on the New Covenant (p. 317) says, “The Covenant of Works runs in these terms, ‘Do this and you shall live, and I will be your God.’ This was the covenant which was made with Adam, and the covenant that is expressed by Moses in the Moral Law.” And Mr. Pemble (Vind. Fid. p. 152) says,
“By the Covenant of Works, we understand what we call in one word ‘the law,’ namely, that means of bringing man to salvation, which is by perfect obedience to the will of God. There are also two respective administrations of it: the First is with Adam before his fall, when immortality and happiness were promised to man, and confirmed by an external symbol of the tree of life, on condition that he continued obedient to God in that particular commandment of not eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, as well as in all other things. The Second administration of this covenant was renewing it with the Israelites at Mount Sinai. There, after the light of nature began to grow darker, and corruption had in time worn out the characters of religion and virtue that were first graven in man’s heart, God revived the law by a compendious and full declaration of all the duties required of man towards God and his neighbour, as expressed in the Decalogue. According to the tenor of this law, God entered into covenant with the Israelites, promising to be their God in bestowing on them all the blessings of life and happiness, on condition that they would be his people, obeying all things that he had commanded. They accepted this condition, promising absolute obedience, Exo. 19.8, ‘All things which the Lord has said, we will do;’ and also submitting themselves to punishment in case they disobeyed, saying, ‘Amen’ to the curse of the law, ‘Cursed is everyone that does not confirm all the words of the law: and all the people shall say, Amen.’” Deu 27.26
And Mr. Walker, on the Covenant (p. 128) says, that “the first part of the covenant which God made with Israel at Horeb, was nothing but a renewing of the old Covenant of Works which God made with Adam in paradise.” And it is generally laid down by our divines that we are delivered from the Law by Christ, as it is a covenant.
Nom. But, sir, were the children of Israel better able at this time to perform the condition of the Covenant of Works, than either Adam or any of the old patriarchs were, that God should renew it with them now, rather than before?
Evan. No, indeed. God did not renew it with them now and not before, because they were better able to keep it, but because they had greater need to be made acquainted with what the Covenant of Works is, than those before. For though it is true that the Ten Commandments — which at first were perfectly written in Adam’s heart — were greatly obliterated by his fall, yet some impressions and relics of it still remaine. And Adam himself was very sensible of his fall, and the rest of the fathers were helped by tradition. And, Cameron says, “God spoke to the patriarchs from heaven, yes, and he spoke to them by his angels,” but by this time, sin had almost obliterated and defaced the impressions of the law written in their hearts. They were so corrupted by being in Egypt so long, that the instructions and ordinances of their fathers were almost worn out of mind. And their fall in Adam was almost forgotten, as the apostle testifies in Rom. 5.13-14, saying, “Before the time of the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.” Indeed, in that long course of time between Adam and Moses, men had forgotten what sin was. So, although God had made a promise of blessing to Abraham and to all his seed who would plead an interest in it, these people at this time were proud and secure, and heedless of their estate. Though “sin was in them, and death reigned over them,” yet being without a law to evidence this sin and death to their consciences, they did not impute it to themselves; they would not admit it or charge themselves with it. And so, as a consequence, they found no need to plead the promise made to Abraham. Therefore, Rom. 5.20, “the law entered,” that Adam’s offence and their own actual transgression might abound. So that now, the Lord saw it was necessary that there should be a new edition and publication of the Covenant of Works — to sooner compel the elect unbelievers to come to Christ, the promised seed — and that the grace of God in Christ might appear more exceedingly glorious to the elect believers. So that you see the Lord’s intention in this was that, by looking at this covenant, they might be reminded what their duty of old was, when they were in Adam’s loins; yes, and what their duty still was, if they would stand to that covenant and go the old and natural way to work. Yes, and hereby they were also to see what their present infirmity was in not doing their duty. So that, seeing it was impossible to obtain life by that way of works first appointed in paradise, they might be humbled, and more heedfully mind the promise made to their father Abraham, and thus hasten to lay hold on the Messiah, or promised Seed.
Nom. Then sir, it seems that the Lord did not renew the Covenant of Works with them, to the intent that they would obtain eternal life by yielding obedience to it?
Evan. No, indeed; God never made the Covenant of Works with any man since the fall, either with the expectation that he would fulfil it, or to give him life by it; for God never appoints anything to an end to which it is utterly unsuitable and improper. Now the law, as it is the Covenant of Works, has become weak and unprofitable for the purpose of salvation; and therefore God has never appointed it to man, since the fall, to that end. And besides, it is manifest that the purpose of God in the covenant made with Abraham, was to give life and salvation by grace and promise. And therefore, his purpose in renewing the Covenant of Works was not, nor could it be, to give life and salvation by working. For then there would have been contradictions in the covenants, and instability in God who made them. Therefore let no man imagine that God published the Covenant of Works on Mount Sinai, as though he had been mutable, and so changed his determination in that covenant made with Abraham; nor let any man suppose that God now, in the process of time, has found a better way for man’s salvation than he knew before. For just as the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham would have been needless if the Covenant of Works made with Adam had given him and his believing seed life, so once the Covenant of Grace was made, it was needless to renew the Covenant of Works after, to the end that righteousness of life could be had by observing it.
This will still more evidently appear if we consider that the apostle, speaking of the Covenant of Works as it was given on Mount Sinai, says, “It was added because of transgressions,” Gal. 3.19. It was not set up as a solid rule of righteousness as it was given to Adam in paradise, but it was added or put to that purpose; it was not set up as a thing in large by itself.
Nom. Then, sir, it would seem that the Covenant of Works was added to the Covenant of Grace, to make it more complete.
Evan. No! You are not to understand the apostle as saying it was added as an ingredient, as a part of the Covenant of Grace, as if that covenant had been incomplete without the Covenant of Works. For then the same covenant would have consisted of contradictory materials, and so it would have defeated itself. For the apostle says, “If it is by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace: but if it is of works, then it is no more of grace; otherwise work is no more work,” Rom. 11.6. But it was added by way of subserviency and attendance, to better advance and make effectual the Covenant of Grace. So that, although the same covenant that was made with Adam was renewed on Mount Sinai, yet I still say that it was not for the same purpose. For this is what God aimed at in making the Covenant of Works with man in his innocency: to have that which was his due from man. But God made it with the Israelites for no other end than that man, being thereby convinced of his weakness, might flee to Christ. So that it was renewed only to help forward and introduce another and a better covenant — and so to be a manuduction to Christ — that is, to uncover sin, to waken the conscience, and to convince them of their own impotency, and so to drive them out of themselves to Christ.
Know then, I beseech you, that all this while there was no other way of life given, either in whole or part, than the Covenant of Grace. All this while God only pursued the design of his own grace. And therefore, there was no inconsistency either in God’s will or in his acts — only such was his mercy, that he subordinated the Covenant of Works, and made it subservient to the Covenant of Grace, and did so to tend to evangelical purposes.
Nom. Yet, sir, I think it is somewhat strange that the Lord would set them upon doing the law, and promise them life for doing so, yet never intend it.
Evan. Though he did so, he neither required from them what was unjust, nor did he dissemble with them in the promise. For the Lord may justly require perfect obedience at all men’s hands, by virtue of that covenant which was made with them in Adam. And if any man could yield perfect obedience to the law, both in doing and suffering it, he would have eternal life. For we may not deny (says Calvin) that the reward of eternal salvation belongs to the upright obedience of the law. God knew well enough that the Israelites were never able to yield such obedience, yet he saw fit to propound eternal life to them on these terms, so he might speak to them in their own inclination, as indeed was fitting. For they swelled with a mad assurance in themselves, saying, “All that the Lord commands we will do,” and be obedient, Exo. 19.8. Well, said the Lord, if you would do it, why, here is a law to be kept; and if you can fully observe the righteousness of it, you shall be saved. He was purposely sending them to the law to awaken and convince them, to sentence and humble them, and to make them see their own folly in seeking life that way. In short, he did it to make them see the terms under which they stood, so that they might be brought out of themselves, and expect nothing from the law in relation to life, but to expect all from Christ. For how would a man see his need for life by Christ, if he does not first see that he has fallen from the way of life? And how would he understand how far he had strayed from the way of life, unless he first finds what that way of life is? Therefore it was necessary for the Lord to deal with them in such a manner as to drive them out of themselves, and from all confidence in the works of the law, so that, by faith in Christ, they might obtain righteousness and life. And in just this way, our Saviour dealt with that young expounder of the law, in Mat. 19.16, who it seems was sick from the same disease: “Good Master,” he says, “what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?” He does not, says Calvin, simply ask which way or by what means he should come to eternal life, but what good he should do to get it. By this it appears that he was a proud justiciary, one that swelled in his fleshly opinion that he could keep the law, and be saved by it. Therefore he is worthily sent to the law to work himself weary, and to see his need to come to Christ for rest. And thus you see that the Lord added a fiery law to the former promises made to the fathers. He gave this law to stubborn and stiff-necked Israel at Mount Sinai, in thunder and lightning, and with a terrible voice, by which to break and tame them, and make them sigh and long for the promised Redeemer.