Mosaic Covenant

[ABrauny]

Alright I posted this in the Presbie forum and no one has responded, I hope someone does here. Is the Mosaic covenant part of the covenant of grace or is it the covenant of works republished? I hope I worded that all correctly.

 

[LuxMundi]

I would say that it's the republication of the covenant of works

 

[JM]

As I understand it; the Mosaic covenant is a republication of the covenant made with Adam.

A. W. Pink is very helpful on this subject:

Divine Covenants by A.W. Pink-Part Five-The Sinaitic Covenant

 

[JM]

If you are afraid of Baptist covenant theology perhaps a quote from John Owen?

“Scripture does plainly and expressly make mention of two testaments, or covenants, and distinguish between them in such a way as can hardly be accommodated by a twofold administration of the same covenant…Wherefore we must grant two distinct covenants, rather than merely a twofold administration of the same covenant, to be intended.” Commentary on Hebrews 8

 

[Anoetos]

Too often I think we come to this discussion with a Lutheran understanding and assume that these covenants are mutually exclusive. Many have pointed out that the C of W is a "gracious dispensation" (Kline most forcefully I believe)...God was not constrained to do it and obedience to the law (for example), while not meritorious of favor, is a blessing to the redeemed.

That said, I agree that the mosaic covenant is a publication of the covenant with Adam.

 

[JM]

Kim Riddlebarger mentions the Law and Gospel distinction made by Lutherans to be the equivalent to the Reformed idea of c of w and c of g. It may have been an unguarded or unqualified statement but he went on to Gal. 3 and 4 to show how the Mosaic covenant was Law and the new covenant fulfilled by Christ was Gospel. His lectures are excellent. Riddlebarger argues for Amillennialism based on Calvinistic covenantalism and it is altogether pleasing for it makes sense of scripture.

jm

 

[Anoetos]

Riddlebarger is superb and I have benefited greatly from his teaching. I agree that the usual Reformed covenantal distinction corresponds with the Lutheran belief about Law and Gospel, but not exactly. Lutherans tend to take a much more exclusive view of it. The Lutheran teaching on Law and Gospel becomes practically antinomian when it hits the ground. I say this as someone who spent 13 years in the Missouri Synod.

This is something Riddlebarger points out and takes pains to disagree with in "Four Views on Law and Gospel" where he takes a modified Lutheran approach. Incidentally, this is the book than introduced me to him.

 

[GodsGirlToday61]

Jesus made it clear that he came to 'fulfill', i.e. fill up full or finish the Old Covenant. What was lacking? The Old Covenant made Hebrews 'aware of sin' but didn't stop the sinning (see Pauline Letters on this), and 2) Jesus felt that the Pharisees were binding themselves (enslaving themselves) by following the letter but not the Spirit of The Law, so he did a couple of centrally important things:

1) He pointed out that The Old Covenant Commandments boiled down to the Two Most Important LIVED!!!:

Love God with all our hearts, all our minds, all our soul, and all our strength, and
Love Our Neighbors as Ourselves.

Whereas in the Old Covenant acted out to perfection, which it could not, and was not, every Chosen Person had to adhere to every single bit of law (I am reading this Law now, and am in Leviticus, and it's incredibly stringent.) Just trying to adhere to every single detail would bring or keep a person tied to details, details, details--and trying to avoid getting caught for most because, really, read every bit and ask yourself how any People could keep The Law...

Next, the Old Covenant required numerous 'sacrifices' for every sin, like two turtle doves for a certain sin, a spotless ram for another, a lamb for this one, a bull for that... And everything had to be handled by certain people in certain ways on certain days or pay pay pay...

So Jesus took 'The Spirit of the Law' and became the Ultimate, Final Sin Sacrifice, a replacement for all the legalistic codes.

This did not mean--and Jesus made it clear--that we were to do away with, for instance, The Ten Commandments.

Rather, if we believed in Him as The Ultimate Sin Sacrifice, repented of the sins He died for, and daily worked to obey God, we would be 'regenerated' and the Fruits of the Spirit would bear Witness to this Regeneration thereby showing unbelievers The Way, you know, "Let your Light so shine before men..." that God would be attractive, The Way would draw in the Unbelievers, and we would be blessed, i.e. joyful (not happy which is less deep, comes from the world, is experienced here on Earth):

Blessed are they who mourn for they shall be comforted.

Mourning what? (Sin)
Comforted how? (By the holy Spirit whom Jesus referred to as The Comforter)

I pray daily, oh-so-humbly including stutterlng and admitting anger and asking forgiveness for specific sins I've committed this day as well as for those I am not yet aware of (I ask that He show me, even if He has to hit me Spiritually upside the head).

If you read the Pauline Letters, which were written before The Gospels--and I mean give them a close reading, especially Romans, I and II Corinthians, Galatians and 1 Thessolians (pardon spelling), you'll get a great view of Pharisaic Law as viewed by a former Pharisee and 'Jesus-Messiah' Follower.

I enjoy reading, studying, praying and reflecting on the Bible. I grow in Love, I feel so humbled by my wretchedness that some days I say to my husband, I don't know why God loves me but who am I to question God's Will: He does love me so in a way or ways I am unable to see because of my limited vision, He deems me worthy, and when I say 'me' I mean 'We, The Believers' and yes, The Unbelievers because who the heck was I 'before' I came to Believe, in the eyes of The World, or in my own mind, but an Unbeliever...

I try to remember the Unbeliever part, of how God loves us and calls us all; He Chooses fewer but that, as I understand it, is because He invites us but we have the Free Will to deny that Invitation.

I don't feel that I do have the will to deny it, and I feel that I never really did, because always, from the first I can remember after, say, three, I felt guilty, and by the time I was eight, I knew I was guilty of some evil deeds--not just the victim of them...

But my Faith has deepened and my Hope increased and my Charity has more clarity now, so I'm blessed in ways I am just recently realizing, which means if I remain Faithful, Faith, Hope and Charity (Love) will only deepen and increase and lead to Ultimate (Eternal) Blessing, which will be being in God's Presence Forever:

Nothing could be better than working for that, and the working is 'obedience', again, 'by our fruits you shall know us', so imagine the riches that super-naturally matter. <3 <3 <3 (Three hearts are always for The Trinity) ~ Carolyn

 

[JM]

Notes From Hebrews 8.6-9 | Feileadh Mor

A. W. Pink on Hebrews 8.

The republication of the covenant of works at Sinai:

In approaching the subject of the two covenants, the old and the new, it should be pointed out that it is not always an easy matter to determine whether the “old covenant” designates the Mosaic economy or the covenant of works which God made with Adam (Hos. 6:7 margin); nor to decide whether the “new covenant” refers to the Gospel dispensation introduced by Christ, or to the covenant of grace which was inaugurated by the first promise made to Adam (Gen. 3:15) and confirmed to Abraham (Gen. 17). In each case the context must decide. We may add that the principal passages where the two covenants are described and contrasted are found in 2 Corinthians chapter 3, Galatians chapter 3 and 4, Hebrews chapters 8, 9 and 12.
​

Pink, following Owen’s lead, views the old Mosaic covenant as a republication of the covenant of works made with Adam before the fall. He also finds evidence for the new covenant of grace promised to Adam after the fall, fulfilled by the death of the testator Jesus Christ. [Proto-Evangelium]

Commenting on Hebrews 8.6:

This more excellent ministry Christ is here said to have “obtained.” The way whereby the Lord Jesus entered on the whole office and work of His mediation has been expressed in Hebrews 1:4 as by “inheritance”: that is, by free grant and perpetual donation, made unto Him as the Son
​

The ministry of the old covenant was powerless, it never obtained anything and only looked forward to the promised Messiah.
“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” Hebrews 8.7

The covenant which is here referred to is that into which Jehovah entered with Israel at Sinai: see Exodus 19:5; 34:27, 28; Deuteronomy 4:13. Israel’s response is recorded in Exodus 19:8, 24:3. It was ratified by blood: Exodus 24:4-8. This was not the “first” covenant absolutely, but the first made with Israel nationally. Previously, God had made a covenant with Adam (Hos. 6:7), and in some respects the Covenant at Sinai adumbrated [adumbrated: To give a sketchy outline of; To prefigure indistinctly; foreshadow.] it, for it was chiefly one of works.So too He had made a covenant with Abraham, which in some respects adumbrated the Everlasting Covenant, inasmuch as it was one purely of grace. Prior to Sinai, God dealt with Israel on the basis of the Abrahamic covenant, as is clear from Exodus 2:24; 6:3, 4. But it was on the ground of the Sinaitic covenant that Israel entered Canaan: see Joshua 7:11, 15; Judges 2:19-21; 1 Kings 11:11; Jeremiah 34:18, 19.
​

Pink asks the question, Wherein lay its “faultiness?” It was wholly external, accompanied by no internal efficacy. It set before Israel an objective standard but supplied no power to measure up to it. It treated with men in the flesh, and therefore the law was impotent through the weakness of the flesh (Rom. 8:3). It provided a sacrifice for sin, but the value thereof was only ceremonial and transient, failing to actually put away sin. It was unable to secure actual redemption. Hence because of its inadequacy, a new and better covenant was needed.

 

[Don Maurer]

I am interested in this subject, but I have not read that much (truthfully, I read nothing on this subject) and could be a little to the shallow side. I am open to correction, but please do it with respect and be gentle.

My biggest struggle in beginning to read something is with the distinctions that are natural to the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace." Lets begin by looking at the Abrahamic Covenant, and then go to the Mosaic Covenant. How do we look at the Abrahamic Covenant? Is that "Old Covenant" or is that "New Covenant." If it is "Old Covenant" it is also a Covenant of Grace. I am thinking of Galatians 3:8.
" And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed.
Are not concepts of the Gentile nations being blessed in faithful Abraham concepts of Grace? The phrase "preached the gospel" in verse 8 seems very strong in its theology. Certainly we cannot see pure works in the Abrahamic Covenant. The covenant also made Gentiles "Sons of Abraham" by faith (see verse 7). So then, do we consider the Abrahamic Covenant to be related to the Covenant of Grace? If so, is it also part of the New Covenant?"

Also, I would mention the inter-working or continuity of the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, and the New Covenant. I do not want to present this as though there are no differences in the Covenants of the Bible, I want to recognize the diversity also. But as for their inter-relationship I would cite the book of Deuteronomy.
In 6:5 we have the command... "and thou shalt love Jehovah thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." Of course this command is repeated several times in the book of Deuteronomy. Then in Deuteronomy 29:4 we read, "but Jehovah hath not given you a heart to know, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day." So then, Israel never had a chance to Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart. It was a certain give in that they would disobey the command of Deuteronomy 6:5. No chance at all. Thus when we read in Deuteronomy 30:1, "And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither Jehovah thy God hath driven thee," it is obviously inevitable that Israel would come under the curse. Of course we note the term "curse." A part of the curses is that Israel will be dispersed and go into captivity. Paul recognizes this certainty of curse also in Galatians 3:10 is true, "For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them." Doing the law is impossible because one cannot make themselves "Love the Lord they God with all thy heart." Not only is disobedience inevitable, but even repentance is impossible. On the other hand, Deuteronomy 30:2 speaks of repentance and obedience with all the heart. It says, "2 and shalt return unto Jehovah thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul;" The means or power of this repentance is mentioned in Deuteronomy 30:6, "And Jehovah thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love Jehovah thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." So then, the repentance of verse 2 assumes the work of God in verse 6. Verse 6 is then the seed thought which the later "New Covenant" of Jeremiah and Ezekiel speaks of. The New Covenant provides what we as Reformed people call "regeneration." A part of regeneration is that we "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart." Of course Christ had discussions in the Gospels on this phrase. ( See Luke 10:27 "And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself."). When the Lawyer ask Christ what one must do to be saved, the Lawyer correctly quoted the demands from Deuteronomy. Christ correctly approved of what the Lawyer said. (vs 28, "And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.) Something was left out. Deuteronomy 30 verse 6 tells us that when we "Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart" that is the work of God in man, and not a work man can do for God. So then, what that is the command (yes, the command of Deuteronomy) it was not a command that the Lawyer could obey. Something was being left out. Repentance and obedience from the heart is the work of God in Deuteronomy 30:6. Without the circumcised heart, no one can "Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart." They Lawyer could no more succeed then the ancient Jews before him. The Lawyer only would place himself under the curse spoken of by Paul.

Well, I have ranted enough. One thing I question is if the Covenants can be so separated that we can identify a Covenant of Works without grace, or a Covenant of Grace without works. I question the validity of seeing two distinct over-riding Covenants in the Bible. I think one would be preferable. I see a greater inter-relationship in the Covenants then those terms seem to allow. Where does the Covenant of Works end, and the Covenant of Grace begin? It seems all grey to me. This is not to say I do not see any difference between the concept of works and grace. Oh my, there is huge differences. But do the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace" require such a separation of works and grace that they do not properly reflect the true inter-related nature of the biblical covenants? Well, as I said, I am no authority on this issue.

 

[JM]

My biggest struggle in beginning to read something is with the distinctions that are natural to the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace."

One thing I question is if the Covenants can be so separated that we can identify a Covenant of Works without grace, or a Covenant of Grace without works. I question the validity of seeing two distinct over-riding Covenants in the Bible. I think one would be preferable. I see a greater inter-relationship in the Covenants then those terms seem to allow. Where does the Covenant of Works end, and the Covenant of Grace begin? It seems all grey to me. This is not to say I do not see any difference between the concept of works and grace. Oh my, there is huge differences. But do the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace" require such a separation of works and grace that they do not properly reflect the true inter-related nature of the biblical covenants? Well, as I said, I am no authority on this issue.

Hi Don,

The only advice I can give is to read deeply and widely on the subject of the covenants. I questioned the use of the covenant of works and grace distinction but found it an inescapable conclusion. You are either working your way to heaven and failing terribly or you are saved by grace. The covenant of works has conditions you have to meet and the covenant of grace has conditions that are already fulfilled in Christ. The Lutherans often call it Law and Gospel but it isn't exactly the same as Reformed thought, just similar. When you study this issue the first thing that you will find is that disagreement is common even within the hermetically sealed Reformed traditions.

jm

 

[ReverendRV]

Alright I posted this in the Presbie forum and no one has responded, I hope someone does here. Is the Mosaic covenant part of the covenant of grace or is it the covenant of works republished? I hope I worded that all correctly.

I found a Cite once that showed the difference between Presbyterian Covenant Theology, and Baptist Covenant Theology. Basically Presbyterians and Baptists have the same view on Covenant Theology; but with only one difference. BCT (Baptist Covenant Theology) drew a distinction between the Old and New Covenants as if they they were different; but PCT (Presbyterian Covenant Theology) didn't. PCT has the Old and the New under 'One Umbrella' of Covenant Theology. When I saw this, I couldn't help but to think that PCT was practically Dispensationalism. They have all their Dispensations under one umbrella of Dispensations as well...

I being a Reformed Baptist, prefer to have the Old and New Covenants disconnected and distinct...

 

[Jonaitis]

Alright I posted this in the Presbie forum and no one has responded, I hope someone does here. Is the Mosaic covenant part of the covenant of grace or is it the covenant of works republished? I hope I worded that all correctly.

The Mosaic Covenant is the republication of the Covenant of Works. Christ's benefits were foreshadowed, typified, and promised, but were not conveyed or transmitted, through the Covenant. It had no efficacy to impart grace.

 

[Soyeong]

In Psalms 119:29-30, David wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faithfulness, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, and the Mosaic Covenant is a covenant of grace. Furthermore, in Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way that he might know Him and Israel too, in 1 Kings 2:1-3, God taught how to walk in His way through the Mosaic Law, and in John 17:3, eternal life is knowing God and Jesus, which again is salvation by grace through faith, and a covenant of grace. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so the Mosaic Covenant is a covenant of grace by any standard that the New Covenant can be considered to be a covenant of grace, and a covenant of works is a fundamentally flawed distinction.

 

[Soyeong]

I am interested in this subject, but I have not read that much (truthfully, I read nothing on this subject) and could be a little to the shallow side. I am open to correction, but please do it with respect and be gentle.

My biggest struggle in beginning to read something is with the distinctions that are natural to the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace." Lets begin by looking at the Abrahamic Covenant, and then go to the Mosaic Covenant. How do we look at the Abrahamic Covenant? Is that "Old Covenant" or is that "New Covenant." If it is "Old Covenant" it is also a Covenant of Grace. I am thinking of Galatians 3:8.
" And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed.
Are not concepts of the Gentile nations being blessed in faithful Abraham concepts of Grace? The phrase "preached the gospel" in verse 8 seems very strong in its theology. Certainly we cannot see pure works in the Abrahamic Covenant. The covenant also made Gentiles "Sons of Abraham" by faith (see verse 7). So then, do we consider the Abrahamic Covenant to be related to the Covenant of Grace? If so, is it also part of the New Covenant?"

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and God's law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is an integral part of the Gospel message, which was the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8). The Kingdom of God is where people live blessed lives by walking in God's way in obedience to His law and are a blessing to others by turning them from their wickedness and teaching them how to live blessed lives by walking in God's way in obedience to His law, and this is how the Kingdom is spread and the children of Abraham are multiplied. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did, so the children of Abraham are not multiplied through physical descendants, but through teaching people to do the same works that he did through having faith in the promise (Romans 9:6-8).

In Genesis 12:1-5, God will make Abraham a great nation, and He will bless him and make his name great, so that he will be a blessing. God will bless those who bless him, curse those who curse him, and in him all of the families of the earth will be blessed. Furthermore, it speaks about Abraham taking with him all of the souls that they had made in Haran, which is speaking about people that he had blessed by teaching the Gospel to. In Genesis 18:19, God knew Abraham that he would teach his children and those of his household to walk in His way by doing righteousness and justice that the Lord may bring to him all that He has promised. In Genesis 26:4-5, God will multiply Abraham's children as the stars in the heaven, to his children He will give all of these lands, and through his children all of the people of the earth will be blessed because Abraham heard God's voice and guarded His charge, His commandments, His statutes, and His laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if they love God by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then they will live and multiply, and the Lord will bless them in the land that they are entering to possess. So all of the promises were made to Abraham and brought about through faith because he walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children and those of his household to do that, and because they did that.

God's law is how the children of Abraham knew how to live blessed lives by walking in His way (Psalms 119:1-3), so the way to inherit the promise through faith of being a blessing to the nations is again by teaching the nations to turn from their wickedness and how to walk in God's way, and Jesus came as the fulfillment of that promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26).

Also, I would mention the inter-working or continuity of the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, and the New Covenant. I do not want to present this as though there are no differences in the Covenants of the Bible, I want to recognize the diversity also. But as for their inter-relationship I would cite the book of Deuteronomy.
In 6:5 we have the command... "and thou shalt love Jehovah thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." Of course this command is repeated several times in the book of Deuteronomy. Then in Deuteronomy 29:4 we read, "but Jehovah hath not given you a heart to know, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day." So then, Israel never had a chance to Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart. It was a certain give in that they would disobey the command of Deuteronomy 6:5. No chance at all. Thus when we read in Deuteronomy 30:1, "And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither Jehovah thy God hath driven thee," it is obviously inevitable that Israel would come under the curse. Of course we note the term "curse." A part of the curses is that Israel will be dispersed and go into captivity. Paul recognizes this certainty of curse also in Galatians 3:10 is true, "For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them." Doing the law is impossible because one cannot make themselves "Love the Lord they God with all thy heart." Not only is disobedience inevitable, but even repentance is impossible. On the other hand, Deuteronomy 30:2 speaks of repentance and obedience with all the heart. It says, "2 and shalt return unto Jehovah thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul;" The means or power of this repentance is mentioned in Deuteronomy 30:6, "And Jehovah thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love Jehovah thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." So then, the repentance of verse 2 assumes the work of God in verse 6. Verse 6 is then the seed thought which the later "New Covenant" of Jeremiah and Ezekiel speaks of. The New Covenant provides what we as Reformed people call "regeneration." A part of regeneration is that we "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart." Of course Christ had discussions in the Gospels on this phrase. ( See Luke 10:27 "And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself."). When the Lawyer ask Christ what one must do to be saved, the Lawyer correctly quoted the demands from Deuteronomy. Christ correctly approved of what the Lawyer said. (vs 28, "And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.) Something was left out. Deuteronomy 30 verse 6 tells us that when we "Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart" that is the work of God in man, and not a work man can do for God. So then, what that is the command (yes, the command of Deuteronomy) it was not a command that the Lawyer could obey. Something was being left out. Repentance and obedience from the heart is the work of God in Deuteronomy 30:6. Without the circumcised heart, no one can "Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart." They Lawyer could no more succeed then the ancient Jews before him. The Lawyer only would place himself under the curse spoken of by Paul.

In Deuteronomy 10:12-16, God wanted His people to circumcise their hearts and obey His commands. In Deuteronomy 30:1-10, it prophesies about a time when God will circumcise their hearts and they will return to obedience to God's law and be blessed in accordance with the promise. Furthermore, in Deuteronomy 30:11-20, it says that God's law is not too difficult to obey and that obedience brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented a possibility and as a choice, not as God giving the law in order to curse His children for failing to do what was impossible for them to do. In Galatians 3:10-11, the curse in Deuteronomy 28 is not for those who rely on God's law, but for those who do not. In Ezekiel 36:26-27, God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and send his Spirit to lead us to obey His law, and in Jeremiah 31:33, God will put His law in our minds and write it on our hearts by means of the Spirit, so these verses are describing God circumcising our hearts and leading us to obey His law and you are correct to connect the New Covenant that Ezekiel and Jeremiah speak about with Deuteronomy 30:6. Furthermore, in Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to God's law, which was the same way to tell for a Jew, and circumcision of the heart is a matter of the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those with uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and do not obey God's law.

Well, I have ranted enough. One thing I question is if the Covenants can be so separated that we can identify a Covenant of Works without grace, or a Covenant of Grace without works. I question the validity of seeing two distinct over-riding Covenants in the Bible. I think one would be preferable. I see a greater inter-relationship in the Covenants then those terms seem to allow. Where does the Covenant of Works end, and the Covenant of Grace begin? It seems all grey to me. This is not to say I do not see any difference between the concept of works and grace. Oh my, there is huge differences. But do the terms "Covenant of Works" and "Covenant of Grace" require such a separation of works and grace that they do not properly reflect the true inter-related nature of the biblical covenants? Well, as I said, I am no authority on this issue.

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way that he might know Him, and in John 17:3, eternal life is knowing God and Jesus, so I don't think it is correct to try to separate it into a covenant of works and a covenant of grace, but rather God showed His grace to people throughout the Bible by teaching us to walk in His way in obedience to His law.