Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Hosea 6:7 and the Covenant of Works?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 січ 2024
- In this video, we look at whether Hosea 6:7 supports the idea of a Covenant of Works. Many people use Hosea 6:7 to support Covenant Theology and the Covenant of Works, but what is the context of Hosea 6:7?
#bible #covenanttheology #covenantofworks #biblicalinterpretation
Shepherds Theological Seminary (where Peter Goeman teaches): shepherds.edu/
The Bible Sojourner Audio podcast: anchor.fm/the-...
More About The Bible Sojourner Host, Peter Goeman: petergoeman.com
What a great lesson!
I subscribed.👍👍
Thanks! God bless you.
Ah, starting my day off with a Bible Sojourner video! Always a highlight in my UA-cam traversing.
This is pretty shaky proof text for a covenant of works. I definitely wouldn’t stake my claim on it.
But this is how we should respond: slow down, read the context and see if we are making the verse say what we want or if there is a much more viable alternative understanding. Appreciate your work and effort, brother!
You’re kind John! And couldn’t say it better myself: slow er down, read the text within the context.
Thank you so much for this excellent study. I do hold to the covenant of works but concerning this passage we must realize that it may not be one to support this belief. I have profited a great deal from your and Dr. Vlach's teaching. I consider myself to be dispensational but I also hold to the basics of covenant theology. I respect your convictions but I see the covenant of works implied in the Genesis account, in Romans 5:19, and in Romans 2:13. The Bible teaches that we do definitely need to perfectly keep God's Law to be saved, and the covenant of works doctrine seems to me to be the best
explanation of how to explain how it fits in with justification by faith alone and the many passages that on the surface seem to teach salvation by works but actually teach salvation on the basis of Christ's perfect obedience imputed to us received through faith all as a gift from God.
Thank you again for all your wonderful UA-cam videos.
Thanks so much for the encouragement! Really enjoy talking with people who can think for themselves, and who can disagree with charitability. Thanks for setting such a great example to other believers!
My only thought on the specific covenant of works idea is that I am actually open to a covenant being made with Adam in Genesis, but I think the evidence for making it a covenant of works seems lacking to me. I would expect any covenant that God made with Adam to follow similar definitions and ideas of the covenants we see elsewhere between God and individuals. I have not seen convincing proof of a covenant of "works" being found in the early parts of Genesis. We could call it a creation covenant, but the work would be to define it somehow--which I don't think we can do.
It may be that the Romans passages could be understood in other ways outside of the Covenant of Works paradigm, but I definitely think those are good conversations to have!
Appreciate the healthy interaction! Keep up the good work.
Thank you, I always look forward to your videos and I always learn so much from them.
I too agree that there must be some type of covenant of works with Adam. I think it’s implicit in the commandment not to eat from the tree of the knowledge/experience of good and evil and in the nature of God as a moral being.
The basic idea of the covenant of works is that obedience is blessed with life and disobedience results in death. It’s very important as Hebrews 10 teaches that Jesus not only fulfilled the suffering death on our behalf, but it was his obedience that actually put aside the need for sacrifice (confession of sin and punishment of death for man).
I think we can distinguish between a basic covenant of works and a robust covenant of works in theology.
The robust view includes the ideas of probation, and that Adam was “earning” his way to a more perfect state where he could not fall into sin. Sometimes it is suggested that Adam did not yet have access to the tree of life.
The more basic view of a covenant of works would simply be that Adam maintained his righteous status through continual obedience to God’s moral standards in creation and his command not to eat of the forbidden tree.
There is no reason to think Adam did not have access to the tree of life. The life of such a tree was not a one and done sort of consumption, but like the obedience and relationship of love with God is an ongoing repetitive reality.
One could even acknowledge a teleology to Adam’s maturity in righteousness which is similar to a probationary period of testing, but it would just be the idea that Adam could have come to a more complete state of moral maturity where even the possibility of sinning might have become impossible for him. But this does not need to be coupled with the idea that a certain quanta of works need to be done to merit “eternal life.”
Not sure if that is helpful, but it’s sort of where I have come down.
I think it’s important to have a covenant of works to emphasize the moral nature of man in the Garden.
It’s also helpful in discerning the problems with E.P. Sander’s covenental nomism.
I’ve noticed that some dispensationalists can tend to fall into agreement with Sanders and certain New Perspectives on Paul because they think opposition to the covenant of works is opposition to covenant theology. And since Sanders and Wright are critiquing the covenant of works, they must be correct.
But I would encourage people to reject covenental nomism. And affirm that there is a basic covenant of works that is central to the Gospel of grace.
One need not adopt all the trappings of covenant theology (covenant of redemption, etc.) to see the importance of the moral obedience of Adam (and therefore of Christ). It’s this that I take to be central to the covenant of works. It’s hard to be orthodox in one’s view of salvation by grace without this Adam theology.
heres a good paper by a friend of mine on his critique of Covenant Theology
sakeofthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2023/07/critique-of-covenant-theology.pdf
Great! Thanks!
Thank you, great video!
Thank you for the encouragement!
Thank you. That is very helpful and reads the text in the context.
Reading the text within its immediate context is crucial. Appreciate the encouragement.
Love it! Thanks brother!
Praise the Lord! Glad it was helpful.
This is a great text to address. I'm a Dispy myself. I'm not sure if Covenant Theology sees the Covenant of works as essential. Isn't it debatable even amongst the Reformed as to whether the scripture presents it?
You are correct! Definitely not all Covenant Theologians have believed the covenant of works is supported by Scripture. But I will say that the vast majority of them do believe it. Of course it is another question entirely of whether or not Hosea 6:7 supports it.
Appreciate you watching!
Totally agree. I find the Covenant of Works to be the hardest of the three covenants to see in scripture. I'm curious as to the rationale behind why it could be so essential to their system if scriptural evidence is so scant.
If we assume Adam refers to a city (or people of that city), what covenant did they break? I guess we have to conjecture something like a safe passage treaty for Israel?
Yes, there are at least a couple options. (1) could be a violation of the Mosaic covenant to some degree; (2) could be a violation of some other unmentioned covenant they had made with someone else. I lean heavily toward 1. I think the wickedness of Adam was certainly a violation of what Israel was commanded to do within the Mosaic covenant and Law.
so if there is no covenant of works, what saved Adam?
The same thing that saves everyone... God's grace.