Covenant salvation

[Iconoclast]

http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/r...-of-redemption-introduction-by-david-dickson/



In this article we see this;

2. As to the covenant of redemption; for clearing the matter, we must distinguish the sundry acceptions of the word redemption: for,
(1.) Sometime it is taken for the contract and agreement of selling and buying-back to eternal salvation, of lost man, looked upon as in the state of sin and misery. In which sense, we are said to be bought by Christ, both souls and bodies, 1 Cor. 6.19,20, Ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. And this may be called redemption by paction and agreed bargain. (2.) Sometimes redemption is taken for the paying of the price agreed upon. In which sense, Christ is said to have redeemed us, by suffering of the punishment due to us, and ransoming of us, Gal 3.13, Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.
(3.) Sometime redemption is taken for the begun application of the benefits purchased in the covenant by the price paid, Eph. 1.7, In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins, according to the riches of His grace.
(4.) Sometime redemption is taken for the perfect and full possession of all the benefits agreed upon between the Father and Christ His Son the Mediator. In which sense, we are said to be sealed with the holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, Ephes. 1.14. and Ephes. 4.30, it is said, Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption; which is the day of Judgment, when Christ shall put us in full possession of all the blessedness {24} which He purchased by bargain and payment for us.

In this place we take redemption in the first sense, for the covenant past between the Father and Christ His Son, designed Mediator, about our redemption.
How do you understand and obey all lawful commands in light of this...

 

[Iconoclast]

What thoughts do you have on this portion of the article?

A third title is held out, in that He is called a Surety of a better Covenant, Heb. 7.22. Whereby is imported, that God would not pass a Covenant of grace and reconciliation to men, except He had a good Surety who would answer for the debt of the party reconciled, and would undertake to make the reconciled stand to his Covenant. And Christ undertook the Suretyship, and so hath procured and established this Covenant of grace, {28} much better than the Covenant of works, and better than the old Covenant of grace with Israel, as they made use of it. This necessarily imports a Covenant between Him and the Father’s Justice, to whom He becometh surety for us: for, what is suretiship, but a voluntary transferring of another’s debt upon the Surety, obliging to pay the debt for which he engageth as Surety?

A fourth title given to Christ, is, that He is a reconciliation by way of permutation; the atonement, Rom. 5.11, We have by Christ received the atonement, that is, that which hath pacified the Father’s Justice and reconciled Him to us, is made over in a gift unto us; for, by Christ’s procurement we have God made ours, & Christ pacifying God, put, as it were, in our bosom: for, God having sold us to Christ, by taking Christ’s satisfaction for ours, He hath come over to us as reconciled, and given us Christ the Reconciler and the atonement, to be ours. Here is an agreement made between God and Christ, and the condition of the agreement between the parties for our behoof, clearly imported and presupposed.

The fifth title given to Christ, is this, He is called the propitiation, 1 John 2.2, Whereby God is pacified, not only for the believing Jews, but also for the whole elect World, which should believe in Him. And if He be the pacifying propitiation, then God hath satisfaction in all that His Justice craved from Christ for the elect; and, Rom. 3.25. He is called a propitiatory sacrifice, wherewith God is so well pleased, that He makes offer of Him to us, and sets Him forth to us for pacifying our Conscience through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for remission of sins, without breach of Justice; wherein, what price God required and was paid by Christ, is insinuated and presupposed; for, satisfaction could not be, except the price agreed upon, had been promised and accepted before in Covenanting. {29}

 

[convicted1]

Christ, the eternal Redeemer of His people that His Father gave to Him, came to accomplish it at the cross. He came to....


--save His people from their sins....Matthew 1:21
--gather His sheep into the sheepfold....John 10, Ezekiel 34
--lay His life down for His sheep...John 10
--give them an abundant life....John 10:10
--accomplish the will of His Father....John 6:39
--raise from the dead and ascend to the Father...Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20
--be their Mediator....1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 8:6, 9:15, and 12:24
--return to take them back with Him....1 Cor. 15, and 1 Thess. 4


We who are saved, are saved because God made a covenant with us via His Son from the foundation of the world. Christ came to fulfill that eternal covenant via His death, burial and resurrection...

 

[evangelist6589]

http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/r...-of-redemption-introduction-by-david-dickson/







In this article we see this;



2. As to the covenant of redemption; for clearing the matter, we must distinguish the sundry acceptions of the word redemption: for,

(1.) Sometime it is taken for the contract and agreement of selling and buying-back to eternal salvation, of lost man, looked upon as in the state of sin and misery. In which sense, we are said to be bought by Christ, both souls and bodies, 1 Cor. 6.19,20, Ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. And this may be called redemption by paction and agreed bargain. (2.) Sometimes redemption is taken for the paying of the price agreed upon. In which sense, Christ is said to have redeemed us, by suffering of the punishment due to us, and ransoming of us, Gal 3.13, Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.

(3.) Sometime redemption is taken for the begun application of the benefits purchased in the covenant by the price paid, Eph. 1.7, In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins, according to the riches of His grace.

(4.) Sometime redemption is taken for the perfect and full possession of all the benefits agreed upon between the Father and Christ His Son the Mediator. In which sense, we are said to be sealed with the holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, Ephes. 1.14. and Ephes. 4.30, it is said, Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption; which is the day of Judgment, when Christ shall put us in full possession of all the blessedness {24} which He purchased by bargain and payment for us.



In this place we take redemption in the first sense, for the covenant past between the Father and Christ His Son, designed Mediator, about our redemption.

How do you understand and obey all lawful commands in light of this...

I disagree. Although I read many reformed authors I think they are wrong in their covenant theology. The best Calvinists also hold to Dispensational eschatology.

 

[Iconoclast]

I disagree. Although I read many reformed authors I think they are wrong in their covenant theology. The best Calvinists also hold to Dispensational eschatology.

where do you think they have gone wrong name four or five things will you think that
theology is wrong

 

[Iconoclast]

EV

I disagree.

with what?

Although I read many reformed authors I think they are wrong in their covenant theology.

wrong about what?

The best Calvinists also hold to Dispensational eschatology.

the best????? what do you mean?

 

[percho]

For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. Romans 4:13

Does that verse pertain to a covenant?

Is it related to Gal. 3:16 - 19,21 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Are they both related to Hebrews 1:1,2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

Is the covenant actually between God the Father and the Son of God who is also the seed of Abraham? Is Christ, the Son of the Living God, the true heir and the promise of him being that heir, was given to Abraham of whom he was also the seed?

 

[percho]

I disagree. Although I read many reformed authors I think they are wrong in their covenant theology. The best Calvinists also hold to Dispensational eschatology.

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 1 Peter 1:18-20

Being before the foundation of the world the redemptive price was set, the blood of Christ; Is that the purpose for the following? For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; <Rom 8:20 Was Adam created in the following manner? For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Who was the seller? Who was the buyer? Who is the redeemer? From whom/what is one redeemed?

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb 2:14
Hosea 13:14 I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

Who received the promise of God bringing the faith in the redeeming blood?
And if Christ be not raised, your faith vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15:17

 

[Iconoclast]

percho

For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. Romans 4:13

Does that verse pertain to a covenant?

yes

Is it related to Gal. 3:16 - 19,21 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

yes

Are they both related to Hebrews 1:1,2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

Is the covenant actually between God the Father and the Son of God who is also the seed of Abraham? Is Christ, the Son of the Living God, the true heir and the promise of him being that heir, was given to Abraham of whom he was also the seed?[/QUOTE]

yes...the whole bible is about this topic....it is central to scripture. Anyone not teaching on this is not teaching correctly at all. we know this because look at the announcement in LUKE 1;
67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,

68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,

69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;

70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;

72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;

73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,

74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,

75 In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life

 

[percho]

percho



yes

yes




yes...the whole bible is about this topic....it is central to scripture. Anyone not teaching on this is not teaching correctly at all. we know this because look at the announcement in LUKE 1;
67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,

68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,

69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;

70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;

72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;

73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,

74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,

75 In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life

So is the covenant that pertains to our salvation, in reality the covenant of God, made before the foundation of the world? That covenant being that God in the fullness of time would send fourth his Son, the Christ, by being born of woman, as his heir, of the promise he made, before the world began, the hope of eternal life? That Son would give his life, which was in his blood and for doing so, would inherit the promise of God and also by inheritance, obtained a name, more excellent than the angels. Heb 1:3 Phil 2:8,9

Therefore, Jesus having inherited the promise, actually became the author of eternal salvation, as stated in Hebrews 5:9?

By learning and becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, it was Jesus who was the, obedience of faith, in Romans 1:5 and 16:26? Both words being nouns.

 

[Iconoclast]

So is the covenant that pertains to our salvation, in reality the covenant of God, made before the foundation of the world? That covenant being that God in the fullness of time would send fourth his Son, the Christ, by being born of woman, as his heir, of the promise he made, before the world began, the hope of eternal life? That Son would give his life, which was in his blood and for doing so, would inherit the promise of God and also by inheritance, obtained a name, more excellent than the angels. Heb 1:3 Phil 2:8,9

Therefore, Jesus having inherited the promise, actually became the author of eternal salvation, as stated in Hebrews 5:9?

By learning and becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, it was Jesus who was the, obedience of faith, in Romans 1:5 and 16:26? Both words being nouns.

Yes.....exactly.....and we are renewed image bearers and Covenant keepers now.
Our conduct has to reflect this truth.

 

[Dr. Bob]

To clarify what should be obvious - "covenant theology" is NOT a "Calvinism" topic.

It is bad theology, of course, but not to be linked or confused with Calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

To clarify what should be obvious - "covenant theology" is NOT a "Calvinism" topic.

It is bad theology, of course, but not to be linked or confused with Calvinism.

:laugh: Even Baptists have a Covenant theology....:wavey: The classic covenant theology is not the only game in town:thumbs:

 

[Rippon]

To clarify what should be obvious - "covenant theology" is NOT a "Calvinism" topic.

It is bad theology, of course, but not to be linked or confused with Calvinism.

On the contrary, prominent Calvinistic Baptists of the past and present have held to it. Are you familiar with Benjamin Keach, Nehemiah Coxe, R.B.C. Howell, John Dagg, Ph. H. Mell and James Boyce from the past? How about Tom Schreiner, Michael Haykin, Geoff Thomas, Richard C. Barcellos, James White, the Renihans, Walter Chantry and all of the men of the Founders?

A.W. Pink should get a good mention.

 

[DHK]

On the contrary, prominent Calvinistic Baptists of the past and present have held to it. Are you familiar with Benjamin Keach, Nehemiah Coxe, R.B.C. Howell, John Dagg, Ph. H. Mell and James Boyce from the past? How about Tom Schreiner, Michael Haykin, Geoff Thomas, Richard C. Barcellos, James White, the Renihans, Walter Chantry and all of the men of the Founders?

A.W. Pink should get a good mention.

Please consider his statement again:

To clarify what should be obvious - "covenant theology" is NOT a "Calvinism" topic.

It is bad theology, of course, but not to be linked or confused with Calvinism.

Covenant theology is not being moved into the Cal/Arm forum because it is not a "Calvinistic" topic, that is, it does not deal directly with Calvinism.
He never said one thing about who is and who isn't a Calvinist. He is speaking of the topic: i.e., Covenant Theology.

Like "eschatology" Covenant Theology is another doctrine.
Eschatology speaks of last things and Covenant theology speaks about covenants.
Calvin speaks about flowers, i.e. "TULIP"

 

[Yeshua1]

:laugh: Even Baptists have a Covenant theology....:wavey: The classic covenant theology is not the only game in town:thumbs:

Reformed Baptists would agree with that, but not those of us who are calvinistic in our theology though...

 

[Iconoclast]

Reformed Baptists would agree with that, but not those of us who are calvinistic in our theology though...

Many would consider that a glaring inconsistency brought on by false dispensational fragmenting of the bible.
Most of us were taught dispy ideas first, then had to work through the scriptures again to see what the others saw before us,

even as a dispy....you have to have some theology of Covenants. The problem is that the dispy timeline fragments or breaks apart the covenants that they are almost unrecognizable to what flows through scripture.

 

[Yeshua1]

Many would consider that a glaring inconsistency brought on by false dispensational fragmenting of the bible.
Most of us were taught dispy ideas first, then had to work through the scriptures again to see what the others saw before us,

even as a dispy....you have to have some theology of Covenants. The problem is that the dispy timeline fragments or breaks apart the covenants that they are almost unrecognizable to what flows through scripture.

No, rather that we do not see the Bible supporting all of the tenants of what is called classical Covenant theology, but good news is that there has been work to mediate and bring Covenant views closer to a Dispy view in some things!

 

[Iconoclast]

Reformed Baptists would agree with that, but not those of us who are calvinistic in our theology though...

How would you say you are Calvinistic? and then deny covenant theology?

How do you explain the Covenants described in scripture?

Do they have anything at all to do with salvation?

 

[Iconoclast]

Yeshua1

No, rather that we do not see the Bible supporting all of the tenants of what is called classical Covenant theology, but good news is that there has been work to mediate and bring Covenant views closer to a Dispy view in some things!

what do you mean?

who is doing this "work"? what exactly does this work teach?