Is the Covenant of Works in the Bible? (w/ Pat Abendroth) | Theocast
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 гру 2022
- On today's episode, Jon and Justin are joined by Pat Abendroth, pastor of Omaha Bible Church and cohost of The Pactum. In the first of two conversations on the covenant of works, the guys answer the question, "Is the covenant of works really in the Bible?" The guys seek to make a case for the legitimacy of the covenant of works from the Scripture and begin to venture into the significance of affirming (or denying) it.
Semper Reformanda: Jon and Justin talk personally with Pat Abendroth about his ministry and about his "journey" from dispensationalism to covenant theology.
SUPPORT Theocast:
theocast.org/give/
FACEBOOK:
Theocast: / theocast.org
TWITTER:
Theocast: / theocast_org
Jon Moffitt: / jonmoffitt
Justin Perdue: / justin_perdue
INSTAGRAM:
Theocast: http: / theocast_org
RELATED VIDEOS & RESOURCES
Our teaching series on covenant theology: theocast.org/introduction-to-...
Our episodes on the implications of the covenant theology: theocast.org/un-perplexing-th...
Our episode "I Just Believe the Bible": theocast.org/i-just-believe-t...
The Pactum Podcast: www.thepactum.org/
Brothers, thank you again for another great episode. I know in my own Christian life, when I came to an understanding of Covenant Theology, it really explained so much about the Bible that was only piecemeal when I was a Dispensationalist.
I had a professor in seminary who, when explaining the covenant of works, said “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…it’s a duck.” In other words, while you don’t have “covenant” or “works” in Genesis 2, you have all of the necessary ingredients for a covenant between God and Adam wherein obedience was the condition and eternal life was the prize held out.
It’s funny because even the great Presbyterian John Murray had problems with the CoW, calling it the Adamic Administration. Yet for all intents and purposes, it was a covenant of works.
I have a combo for the three pods: Theo-co-tum
Brothers, there is no such thing as a "Covenant of Works". Hosea 6:7 is not a reference to a Covenant regarding Adam; the Covenant (Mosaic Law) mentioned was in reference to Israel not Adam (hosea 4:1-2 and 8:1). Adam was not under the Mosaic Law. All Hosea 6:7 is saying is that just like Adam was disobedient to the command of the God at Eden; the sinful men of Gilead, Shechem, etc .... were disobedient as well according to the (Mosaic) Covenant God had made with them at Sinai (exodus 24:3). This particular verse is not saying that Adam was under the same Covenant as Israel was nor is it saying that Adam was under any particular Covenant; that would be a misreading of the text. The verse is simply saying that both Adam and the sinful men of these particular places were disobedient or transgressed God's Law; one (being Adam) who transgressed the command or law of God in Eden and the other (sinful men of various places) who transgressed the Law of God (the mosaic law) carved in stone handed down at Siani. Both groups transgressed God's Law but under different circumstances and essentially different laws. The sinful Israelites mentioned in Hosea 6:7 who transgressed God's Law did not break the same commandment given to Adam (romans 5:14) therefore they were not under the same Covenant.
I believe you missed the point, brother. They're not saying Adam was under the Mosaic law, they're agreeing with you: Adam was under a law, period, not specifically the Mosaic law. There are those who deny Adam was under any sort of Covenantal law, which as you adeptly and succinctly expounded, he was.
Good brothert! I think that read properly you can even argue (and I think a proper account of context would put this as the strongest position) Hosea 6:7 is talking about the city of ADAM. If you look at a map Adam was right in the middle between Shechem and Gilead. You had to pass through Adam to get from one place to the other. Also the second part of Hosea 6:7 (which our covenantal brothers love to ignore and avoid) has the hebrew word "sham" in it, which literaly means "there" locationaly and geopgraphically. It is talking about a place. It is a very geographical passage.
Brothers - have you perhaps considered the concept of 'Covenant of Creation' instead of the 'Covenant of Works'?
Stephen Wellum in his Systematic Theology, a serious 'minded Theologian' (your terms), from Canon to Concept, pages 441 - 452 are compelling, way more compelling methinks than the Theology of Works concept (which is in great tension with Baptist convictions).
did you guys see apologia studios video reacting to you on Theonomy? 6 days ago.
Terribly eisegetical explanation of Hosea 6:7 at around @14:00. To denote "Adam" ( אָדָם ) as a place (cf. Josh. 3:16) is explicitly warranted in the next line of 6:7: "THERE (שָׁ֖ם) they dealt treacherously with Me". But I guess it's easier to associate with liberalism those who disagree than to exegete the plain words of Scripture!
For those looking for the dissertation, it's on www.csmedia1.com/omahabiblechurch.org/pat-abendroth-dissertation.pdf
Thank you, brother
Answering the question, No. CoW is not in the Bible.
"We believe that this covenant with Adam was not a separate covenant, but the first REVELATION of the ONE, everlasting covenant of grace. Certainly if the covenant is everlasting, there can be only one covenant, and Adam, too, was in that covenant...
That this was only a revelation of the one covenant is clear from the fact that Scripture speaks of our being RECONCILED to God after Adam transgressed (2 Cor. 5:18-21). The word reconciliation is very much a covenant word and implies not only a previous relationship that has been damaged, but implies also that the relationship has not been completely destroyed...
All the Adam was and all that he had were by the undeserved favor of God (grace)..."
Portions from 'Doctrines According to Godliness, a primer of Reformed Doctrine' pg. 168, 169.
I think Jeff Durbin showed you on his podcast...something about your dismissive attitude about abortion.
What?!?! Not sure what you are referencing but we believe abortion is murder
Hosea 6:7 is not evidence for a Covenant of works brethren. It is talking about the city of ADAM. If you look at a map Adam was right in the middle between Shechem and Gilead mentioned in the chapter. You had to pass through Adam to get from one place to the other. Also the second part of Hosea 6:7 (which our covenantal brothers love to ignore and avoid) has the hebrew word "sham" in it, which literaly means "there" locationaly and geopgraphically. It is talking about a place. It is a very geographical passage. "There" (In Adam) they were unfaithful to me, that is literally what Hosea 6:7b says. That is not liberal theology, that is going to the original language to do proper exegesis. Covenat Theology is based on logical inferences and conclusions not proper exegesis of the bible, and mind you those conclusion are perfectly logical, but logical does not mean biblical. A good consecuence is not necessarily a necessary consecuence.