The Covenant of Redemption:And it’s Imitations Throughout History

[Cal]

It seems like the concept of a covenant between God and His people and compacts between people and people all had their fomation based and were formed in the image of what is commonly referred to as The Covenant of Redemption. The Covenant of Redemption is a covenant that was entered into between the Father and Son before creation.

It is recorded for us and revealed in Scripture.

2TI 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

The Covenant Between the Father and the Son

The Father said: “I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, …My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. …My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” PSA 89:3 PSA 89:28 PSA 89:34



The Son said: "…thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world" "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;" "..from the time that it was, there am I.." JOH 17:24 PRO 8:30 ISA 48:16



The Father said: "I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house." ISA 42:6-7



The Son said: "…The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name." "…I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me." "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened…Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart." ISA 49:1 ISA 48:16 PSA 40:6-8



The Father said: "…Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified." "…Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased." LUK 3:22 ISA 49:3



The Son said: "…my delights were with the sons of men." "Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee." “And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” PRO 8:31 HEB 2:12 JOH 6:39



The Father said: “But the Lord was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." ISA 53:10 -12



The Son said: "And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me." "The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned. The Lord GOD hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away back." "And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;" HEB 2:13 ISA 8:17 ISA 50:4-5 ISA 49:2



The Father said: "Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him." PSA 2:8-9,12



The Son said: "Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God. And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength." ISA 49:4-5



The Father said: "And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth… Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship…In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;" ISA 49:6-8



The Son said: "The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified." ISA 61:1-3



The Father said: "The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." "That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places. They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them. And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be exalted. Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim." PSA 110:4 ISA 49:9-12



The Son said: "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting." "Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;" ISA 50:6 JOH 17:1, 4-6, 9-10, 20



The Father said: "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." "...Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." “…when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;” JOH 12:28 PSA 2:7,110:1 HEB 1:3



The Son said: "I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels. For as the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations." ISA 61:10-11

“Father, glorify thy name.” JOH 12:28



The Father said: “Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again..” JOH 12:28



The Son said: “For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” JOH 12:49-50. JOH 10:18



The Father said: “ This is my beloved Son: hear him.” LUK 9:35



I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. DAN 7:13-14



Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both (both the Father and the Son). ZEC 6:13



“When man was first created, there was a consultation among the persons of the Trinity. God said, let us make man, etc. So it is in the work of redemption. The Father provides, chooses, sends, and accepts a Savior. The Son is the Savior, who satisfies justice and answers the law, and buys redemption for His people. The Holy Ghost immediately confers the benefits of all this and actually makes the elect partakers of the salvation Christ has wrought.” Jonathon Edwards



Q31: With whom was the covenant of grace made?

A31: The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the elect as his seed. Gal. 3:16; Rom. 5:15-21; Isa. 53:10-11 The Westminster Confession of Faith Larger Catechism



After the Father and Son entered into this Covenant God began revealing His Covenant to His elect beginning with Adam and then to his seed continuing even to today.

 

[Knight]

Excellent post Cal.

The Covenant of Redemption is the one that always gets forgotten or ignored when studying CT. It is, however, the most important.

Thanks for the discourse.

 

[Foundthelight]

Thank you Cal.

 

[Cal]

The Lord then revealed His Covenant of Redemption to His People:

Adam and Eve

GEN 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee (Satan) and the woman, and between thy seed (the children of the devil) and her seed (the children of God); it (Christ) shall bruise thy (Satan) head, and thou (Satan) shalt bruise his (Christ) heel.

Noah

GEN 6:18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

GEN 9:9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;

Abraham

GEN 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

GEN 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

Isaac

GEN 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.

Jacob

EXO 2:24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.

Moses and Israel

EXO 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

David

2CH 21:7 Howbeit the LORD would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and as he promised to give a light to him and to his sons for ever.

2SA 23:1 Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said,

2SA 23:5 Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.

Christians in New Covenant

JOH 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

JOH 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

JOH 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

JOH 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

JER 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

JER 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

JER 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

HEB 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

HEB 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

HEB 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

HEB 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

HEB 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

HEB 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

 

[tigersnare]

GEN 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee (Satan) and the woman, and between thy seed (the children of the devil) and her seed (the children of God); it (Christ) shall bruise thy (Satan) head, and thou (Satan) shalt bruise his (Christ) heel.

Ah, seed theology. I like very much, it explains alot of things in the bible to me.

 

[Cal]

Ah, seed theology. I like very much, it explains alot of things in the bible to me.

I know what you mean, there is the elect seed of Christ born of God and the nonelect seed of the Devil. They will always be at war with each other and the seed of Christ will dominate.

It does explain alot!

 

[Cal]

God's elect began imitating the covenant of redemption that the Lord had revealed to them.


First Social Compact

EXO 24:7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.

Second Social Compact

JOS 24:24 And the people said unto Joshua, The LORD our God will we serve, and his voice will we obey.

JOS 24:25 So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem.

JOS 24:26 And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the LORD.

Third Social Compact

1CH 11:3 Therefore came all the elders of Israel to the king to Hebron; and David made a covenant with them in Hebron before the LORD; and they anointed David king over Israel, according to the word of the LORD by Samuel.

Fourth Social Compact

2CH 15:8 And when Asa heard these words, and the prophecy of Oded the prophet, he took courage, and put away the abominable idols out of all the land of Judah and Benjamin, and out of the cities which he had taken from mount Ephraim, and renewed the altar of the LORD, that was before the porch of the LORD.

2CH 15:9 And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon: for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the LORD his God was with him.

2CH 15:12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul;

2CH 15:13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.

2CH 15:14 And they sware unto the LORD with a loud voice, and with shouting, and with trumpets, and with cornets.

2CH 15:15 And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he was found of them: and the LORD gave them rest round about.

Fifth Social Compact

2CH 23:16 And Jehoiada made a covenant between him, and between all the people, and between the king, that they should be the LORD'S people.

2CH 23:3 And all the congregation made a covenant with the king in the house of God. And he said unto them, Behold, the king's son shall reign, as the LORD hath said of the sons of David. (This was an over throw of government, it was godless and tyrannical and so illegitimate).

Sixth Social Compact

2CH 29:10 Now it is in mine heart to make a covenant with the LORD God of Israel, that his fierce wrath may turn away from us.

2CH 29:20 Then Hezekiah the king rose early, and gathered the rulers of the city, and went up to the house of the LORD.

2CH 29:23 And they brought forth the he goats for the sin offering before the king and the congregation; and they laid their hands upon them:

Seventh Social Compact

2KI 23:2 And the king (Josiah) went up into the house of the LORD, and all the men of Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem with him, and the priests, and the prophets, and all the people, both small and great: and he read in their ears all the words of the book of the covenant which was found in the house of the LORD.

2KI 23:3 And the king stood by a pillar, and made a covenant before the LORD, to walk after the LORD, and to keep his commandments and his testimonies and his statutes with all their heart and all their soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people stood to the covenant.

Eight Social Compact

EZR 10:1 Now when Ezra had prayed, and when he had confessed, weeping and casting himself down before the house of God, there assembled unto him out of Israel a very great congregation of men and women and children: for the people wept very sore.

EZR 10:2 And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing.

EZR 10:3 Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law.

EZR 10:11 Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.

EZR 10:12 Then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do.

Ninth Social Compact

NEH 9:38 And because of all this we make a sure covenant, and write it; and our princes, Levites, and priests, seal unto it.

NEH 10:28 And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;

NEH 10:29 They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the LORD our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes;

Covenantal Community of Saints

The early Christians were taught by the Apostles that they were one unified body.

1CO 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

1CO 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.



They were also taught by the Savior that they were one unified body in covenant.

LUK 22:19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

LUK 22:20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

They were taught to not be in the habit of “forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, to love your neighbor, to help the poor, and obey government.

Middle Age Assemblies

In the 13th century, representative assemblies become a common feature of civil government. “This probably owed something to the example of the church, since representative church councils were the obvious and, indeed, the only precedent.” concludes Anthony Black in his book “Christianity and Republicanism: From St. Cyprian to Rousseau.”

Of course, the church form of government was simply an extension of the Hebrew republican concept of state and synagogue government.

Church members elected ruling elders:

ACT 14:23 When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

1:5 ¶ For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you,

The covenants and social compacts of the middle ages and the resulting reformation are best viewed from their most recent forms in their foundation in the American covenants and compacts.

American Social Compact and It’s Foundations

The early American founders brought over to America a covenant form of government which had been popular in Geneva under John Calvin in the 16th century, Scotland (The National Covenant 1639), and between England, Scotland and Ireland (The Solemn League And Covenant 1643).

A very elderly John Quincy Adams delivered a speech on the 4th of July 1837, America's 61st birthday. John Quincy Adams properly reminded the crowd that one of the most important elements of the American movement for independence had been its spiritual underpinnings. He asked: Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the World, our most joyous and most venerated festival occurs on this day? And why is it that . . . thousands and tens of thousands among us . . . year after year. . . celebrate the birthday of the nation? Is it not that . . . the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?

 

[Cal]

Covenant Theology of New England

As each town and province in New England was founded and established by the early American Puritans and Congregationalists they would establish a covenant between themselves and God. There was very little distinguishment between civil government and the church in those early New England townships. As a result, in order to vote a person had to be a church member. In this regard Thomas Hooker was very much ahead of his time. However, even Hooker embraced the covenant-compact theory of New England as far as it related to the unity of the people under one God.

As a result of these township covenants there was a great deal of unity, identity and common purpose in each local district of New England. However, there was often great disparity in beliefs and government practices from one local township to another. As a result the colonies in early America were not unified. Everyone was raised, went to school and brought up a family pretty much in the same local district that in which they were born.

The Great Awakening would change all that.

Republicanism of the Great Awakening

In Mark Noll’s book America’s God (2002), Noll was able to trace the effects of the Great Awakening as a breaking down of this New England covenant-compact only to be replaced with a similar republican replacement. As the preachers of the Great Awakening traveled from New England to Georgia and back they would cross over not only geographical boundaries but also denominational boundaries.

Most of the denominational boundaries were some form of Calvinism but many were not. There was a lot of resistance from both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic preachers and congregations of these Great Awakening “itinerant” preachers as they were called. The reason for the resistance, Noll records, is primarily due to the exclusiveness of the covenant-compact between the people of each township.

The Great Awakening preachers taught that the scriptures opened up the gospel of Jesus Christ to all who would receive Him. It didn’t matter what your denomination or location was or what your standing in the community was, all that mattered to God was your relationship with Jesus Christ. This theme was stressed with great enthusiasm and received by many colonists.

As a result, the Great Awakening began to unify the colonies. The colonists began breaking out of their exclusive local township covenants only to indirectly enter into a covenant with all Christians in all the colonies. This was what apparently what Christ had originally intended when He prayed;

JOH 17:20 ¶ "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;

JOH 17:21 that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

Even though the Great Awakening had broken down the New England covenant-compact it was only to result in the creation of an ever-larger covenant between all Christians in all the colonies. This creation of unity was the seedling, which ultimately grew into that great green pine tree that appealed to heaven during the War for Independence. This was symbolized in a white flag with a green pine tree and the inscription, "An Appeal to Heaven." This particular flag became familiar on the seas as the ensign of the cruisers commissioned by General Washington, and was noted by many English newspapers of the time.

The Calvinistic heritage of the Great Awakening preachers and the colonists themselves had already instilled a sense of and love for a republican form of government. This sense and love for republicanism by the colonists was inflamed by the sermons of the Great Awakening and that love together with the national unity created by the Great Awakening gave birth of national republicanism in the 13 colonies.

 

[Cal]

“We Hold These Truths…” a Covenant Declared



THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Laws of Natureand of Nature's God

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”



The opening sentence, “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God,” is often regarded as a conscious attempt by Jefferson to describe God in deistic terms. A more thorough study, however, reveals that this terminology had for centuries been part of the canon law of the Roman Catholic Church. From there it passed to Christians more generally in England and became squarely implanted in the English Common Law of the thirteenth century, (Marvin Olasky, “Fighting for Liberty and Virtue: Political and Cultural Wars in Eighteenth Century America”, 1995).



One of Jefferson’s most influential sources was Sir Edward Coke. Coke was a Puritan whose writings on the Common Law served as a central textbook for legal studies at the College of William and Mary, where Jefferson received his formal training, (On February 17, 1826 Jefferson wrote to Madison: “You will recollect that before the revolution, Coke was the universal elementary book of law students.” See Daniel J. Boorstin, “Hidden History”, 1987).



Writing in 1610, Coke explained the meaning of the phrase “law of nature”:



“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction; and this is lex aeterna [the eternal law], the moral law, called also the law of nature…And by the law, written with the finger of God in the heart of man, were the people of God a long time governed, before the law was written by Moses, who was the first reporter or writer of law in the world. The Apostle, in the second chapter to the Romans saith, Cum enim gentes quae legem non habent naturaliter ea quae legis sunt faciant [While the gentiles who do not have the law do naturally the things of the law]…This law of nature, which indeed is the eternal law of the creator, infused into the hearts of the creature at the time of creation, was [before any written laws], and before any judicial or municipal laws.”



Coke grounded the law of nature squarely in the Christian doctrine of creation, not the Stoic philosophy of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Nor for that matter can it be attibuted to the Renaissance and Enlightenment philosophies that took their understanding of natural law from Stoicism.



Jefferson also drew heavily on Sir William Blackstone. Blackstone followed directly in Coke’s footsteps in explaining the law of nature. In his Commentaries, which were among Jefferson’s favorite books, Blackstone devoted seven pages to defining the “law of nature.” Blackstone writes as an orthodox Christian within a long tradition of orthodox Christians:



“As man depends absolutely upon his maker for every thing, it is necessary that he should in all points conform to his Maker’s will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature.”



According to Blackstone, all human laws depended either upon that unwritten law (the law of nature) or upon the Bible: “Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws.”



The concept of natural law appeared in virtually all the key writings that influenced the Founders. The key document of the Westminster Assembly, the Westminister Confession (1646), also used the “light or law of nature.” The Westminster Confession was a statement of faith drawn up by an Assembly of English and Scottish ministers convened by Parliament in order to unify England, Scotland and Ireland against King Charles.



“Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation. (WCF 1:1)



“they who, upon pretense of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God. And, for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity…” (WCF 20:4)



“The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and doth good unto all, and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might.” (WCF 21:1)



“As it is the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God;…” (WCF 21:7)



John Calvin himself had employed the concept of “the law of nature” in the 1500’s:



Now the great Genevan saw it as "evident that the Law of God which we call 'Moral' _ is nothing else than the testimony of Natural Law and of that conscience which God has engraved on the minds of men.... The whole of this equity of which we now speak, is prescribed in it. Hence _ it alone ought to be the aim, the rule, and the end of all laws." (Ib. IV:20:16) For this 'Moral Law of Nature' _ argues John Calvin _ proceeds "from the Source of rectitude Himself, and from the natural feelings implanted in us by Him." For "it flows from the Fountain of Nature itself, and is founded on the general principle of all laws." (Calvin's Comment. on Lev. 18:6, in his Harmony of the Pentateuch, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1968f, III, p 100.)



Explains Calvin: (Institutes II:2:13-15) "Since man is by nature a social animal [alias a gregarious 'enspirited creature'], he is disposed from natural instinct to cherish and preserve society.... So, we see that the minds of all men have impressions of civil order and honesty. Hence it is that every individual understands how human societies must be regulated by laws -- and [every individual] also is able to comprehend the principles of these laws. Hence the universal agreement [in Calvin's day] with regard to such subjects _ both among nations and individuals _ the seeds of them being implanted in the breasts of all....”



ROM 2:14-15 “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.” Here, Calvin comments (Comm. Rom. 2:14-15), that "ignorance is offered in vain as an excuse by the Gentiles _ since they declare by their own deeds that they do have some rule of righteousness. There is no nation so opposed to everything that is human, that it does not keep within the confines of some laws.... "All nations are disposed to make laws...which are implanted by nature in the hearts of men.... The Gentiles had the natural light of righteousness, which supplied the place of The Law by which the Jews are taught...."All the Gentiles alike institute religious rites; make laws to punish adultery, theft, and murder; and commend good faith in commercial transactions and contracts. In this way, they demonstrate their acknowledgment that God is to be worshipped; that adultery, theft and murder are evils; and that honesty is to be esteemed....”



States Calvin Institutes II:2:22) "If the Gentiles have the righteousness of The Law naturally engraven on their minds _ we certainly cannot say they are altogether blind as to the Rule of Life! Nothing indeed is more common _ than for man to be sufficiently instructed in a right course of conduct by Natural Law, of which the Apostle here speaks.... The end of Natural Law, therefore, is to render man inexcusable." ‘Natural Law’ -- says Calvin -- thus "may be not improperly defined: 'the judgment of conscience distinguishing sufficiently between just and unjust'.... By convicting men on their own testimony, [it keeps on] depriving them of all pretext for ignorance."



John Calvin’s influence on the Calvinistic Puritans of the Westminster Assembly and Coke are of course well documented in history.



In Lex Rex Samuel Rutherford in the 1640’s cited the “law of nature” as grounds for political dissent. Richard Hooker, the preeminent theologian and political theorist of the Anglican Church, also championed the “law of nature.” Locke in turn drew upon Rutherford and Hooker. By citing the law of nature at the outset of the Declaration, Jefferson was therefore simply reflecting a long tradition of Christian political and legal theory.

 

[Cal]

Unalienable Rights

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government….”



The term “unalienable rights” was drawn from the English Common Law of property. When people own land or other kinds of property, they may sell it, give it away, rent or lease it, or transfer it to others. In Common Law, to sell or transfer one’s rights to property was to “alienate” them (Blackstone, Commentaries).



Unalienable rights are rights that are so essential to our identity as humans that no one can sell them or give them away without denying one’s own personhood. They are higher than ordinary property rights. Ordinary rights can be bartered, sold, or traded. Unalienable rights cannot. The creator endows people with these unalienable rights, attaching them to human nature. Since unalienable rights are part of the definition of humanity, to take them away is to attack humanity itself.



Unalienable rights were God’s gift to humanity at creation. Jefferson and his colleagues inherited this idea from Christianity.



“When the Patriot leaders were pressed to make an axiomatic case for freedom, they routinely did so on a religious basis…Sam Adams and James Otis, for example, put it that, ‘the right of freedom being the gift of God almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift.’ John Adams likewise contended that human freedom was founded in the ordinance of the Creator…John Dickinson, for instance, said of American freedoms: ‘We claim them from a higher source, from the King of Kings and Lord of all the earth.’…Hamilton’s version was ‘The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among parchments and musty records. They are written…by the Hand of Divinity…The Supreme Being…invested [mankind] with an inviolable right to personal liberty.’ Jay asserted that ‘we are…entitled by the bounty of an indulgent Creator to freedom.” (Medford Stanton Evans, The Theme is Freedom, 1994).



A secondary key point is governments are instituted to protect rights given to us by God. Therefore, the reason for their existence is because of God!



It took centuries to learn that these rights given to us by God were “self-evident” because it had to be made self-evident. That “making” was the legacy of Western Christendom.



Consent of the governed

This of course was a major departure from the ancient Graeco-Roman doctrine of the Divine Rights of Kings that had dominated the world from the fall of the Hebrew Republic up to the days of Calvin. Samuel Rutherford, the Scottish Presbyterian Calvinist theologian, in his book Lex Rex, brought out this teaching of Calvin or the Law is King, which specifically refuted the Divine Rights of Kings theory that Charles I was propagating in his kingdom.



Rutherford wrote Lex Rex at Westminster Abbey in London only a few years before John Locke was a high school student there. Locke’s father was a member of the Puritan forces that fought against King Charles I. What’s more Locke’s father was a personal acquaintance of Rutherford. The Locke family knew Rutherford’s thinking intimately, and given the similarity with Locke’s writings, it is reasonable to suppose that Rutherford’s ideas were planted in young Locke’s mind and became the seed for his political theories.



This Calvinistic doctrine was also adhered too by our Pilgrim fathers who upon settling in America made compacts and covenants throughout the colonies. Starting with the Mayflower Compact and throughout the settling of New England, the Calvinistic Puritans were unanimous on the point that governments foundation is in the voluntary submission of the people. Thomas Hooker, the founder of Connecticut, claimed that to have a legitimate government, “there must of necessity be a mutuall ingagement, each of the other, by their free consent.” John Winthrop, the founder of Boston, concurred: “the essentiall forme of a common weale or body politic…I conceive to be this—The consent of a certaine companie of people, to cohabit together, under one government for their mutual safety and welfare.”



Perry Miller, the celebrated twentieth century historian of the Puritans, states the case plainly:



“The Puritans maintained that government originated in the consent of the people…because they did not believe that any society, civil or ecclesiastical, into which men did not enter of themselves was worthy of the name. Consequently, the social theory of Puritanism, based upon the law of God, was posited also upon the voluntary submission of the citizens.” (Perry Miller and Thomas H. Johnson, eds, The Puritans, 1963)



The Puritan commitment to “free consent of the governed” played a crucial role in America’s founding. Indeed, the United States was explicitly founded on this principle. Although Enlightenment thinkers adopted this principle, they hardly originated it. The Calvinistic Puritans had embraced it before Locke or the French philosopher Rousseau ever picked up a pen. Stanton Evans rightly observes: “The chronological factor is decisive; the evidence cited here not only predates the Second Treatise (of Government—Locke), most of it predates the existence of Locke himself.” (Medford Stanton Evans, The Theme is Freedom Washington, D.C. 1994)



The Protection of Divine Providence

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”



The concept of Divine Providence was part of the Founders’ Protestant heritage. God’s providential care and control of the world had been a huge theme for the Protestant Reformers, especially John Calvin.



In the Institutes of the Christian Religion Calvin described Providence;



“At the outset, then, let my readers grasp that providence means not that by which God idly observes from heaven what takes place on earth, but that by which, as keeper of the keys, he governs all events.” (Inst. 1:16.4)



“From this we gather that his general providence not only flourishes among creatures so as to continue the order of nature, but is by his wonderful plan adapted to a definite and proper end.” (Inst. 1:16.7)



“Yet since the sluggishness of our mind lies far beneath the height of God’s providence, we must employ a distinction to lift it up. Therefore I shall put it this way: however all things may be ordained by God’s purpose and sure distribution, for us they are fortuitous. Not that we think that fortune rules the world and men, tumbling all things at random up and down, for it is fitting that this folly be absent from the Christian’s breast! But since the order, reason, end and necessity of those things which happen for the most part lie hidden in God’s purpose, and are not apprehended by human opinion, those things, which it is certain take place by God’s will, are in a sense fortuitous. For they bear on the face of them no other appearance, whether they are considered in their own nature or weighted according to our knowledge and judgement. Let us imagine, for example, a merchant who, entering a wood with a company of faithful men, unwisely wanders away from his companions, and in his wandering comes upon a robber’s den, falls among thieves, and is slain. His death was not only foreseen by God’s eye, but also determined by his decree. For it is not said that he foresaw how long the life of each man would extend, but that he determined and fixed the bounds that men cannot pass. Yet as far as the capacity of our mind is concerned, all things therein seem fortuitous. What will a Christian think at this point? Just this: whatever happens in a death of this sort he will regard as fortuitous by nature, as it is; yet he will not doubt that God’s providence exercised authority over fortune in directing its end. The same reckoning applies to the contingency of future events. As all future events are uncertain to us, so we hold them in suspense, as if they might incline to one side or the other. Yet in our hearts it nonetheless remains fixed that nothing will take place that the Lord has not previously foreseen.” (Inst. 1:16.9)



“Therefore the Christian heart, since it has been thoroughly persuaded that all things happen by God’s plan, and that nothing takes place by chance, will ever look to him as the principal cause of things, yet will give attention to the secondary causes in their proper place…Gratitude of mind for the favorable outcome of things, patience in adversity, and also incredible freedom from worry about the future all necessarily follow upon this knowledge. Therefore, whatever shall happen prosperously and according to the desire of his heart, God’s servant will attribute wholly to God, whether he feels God’s beneficence through the ministry of men, or has been helped by inanimate creatures. For thus he will reason in his mind; surely it is the Lord who has inclined their hearts to me, who has so bound them to me that they should become the instruments of his kindness toward me.” (Inst. 1:17.6-7)



“To sum up, since God’s will is said to be the cause of all things, I have made his providence the determinative principle for all human plans and works, not only in order to display its force in the elect, who are ruled by the Holy Spirit, but also to compel the reprobate to obedience. (Inst. 1:18.2)



In 1775, a year before writing the Declaration, Jefferson had authored with John Dickinson The Necessity for Taking Up Arms. There they wrote:



“Our cause is just…We gratefully ackowledge, as signal instances of the divine favor toward us, that His Providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy until we were grown up to our present strength…With a humble confidence in the mercies of the Supreme and impartial Judge and Ruler of the Universe, we must devoutly implore His divine goodness to protect us happily through this great conflict.”

 

[seawolf_48]

Dear Cal

I love Covenant Theology, and it is the only system (Theology) that marries the Old and New Testaments (Covenants) together. But I don't believe that the Covenant of Redemption is an actural covenant. Berkhof, several times calls it the Counsel of Redemption, many today refer to it a the Pactum Salutus, and the West. Conf. doesn't even mention it! I believe that God did sit down before the foundation of the world and plan out and decree everything that would happen in time and space, but it is hard for me to see a Covenant between the Father and the Son. That is saying that God is Two Parties, and where is the Holy Spirit? Where is the covenant sign? Why doesn't God mention the Covenant? No, I don't believe that it is a covenant. I do believe that it is a Counsel. The time before creation when the Triune God planned out Redemptive History. During the 17th Century the Theologians had Covenant on the brain and called everything a covnenant, even when it wasn't. I believe that first there was the "Counsel of Redemption" to plan out redemptive History by the Triune God. e.g. all the Before the Foundation verses. Secondly, the Covneant of works (Creation) was made between God and Man, Creator and creation. The covenant sign was the Tree of Life. Thirdly, the Covenant of Grace, which will be a everylasting covenant. It started with sin in the Garden and will last thru eternity. These are my thoughts, I could be wrong, But you must convince me that it is a covenant.

 

[Cal]

Dear Cal

I love Covenant Theology, and it is the only system (Theology) that marries the Old and New Testaments (Covenants) together. But I don't believe that the Covenant of Redemption is an actural covenant. Berkhof, several times calls it the Counsel of Redemption, many today refer to it a the Pactum Salutus, and the West. Conf. doesn't even mention it! I believe that God did sit down before the foundation of the world and plan out and decree everything that would happen in time and space, but it is hard for me to see a Covenant between the Father and the Son. That is saying that God is Two Parties, and where is the Holy Spirit? Where is the covenant sign? Why doesn't God mention the Covenant? No, I don't believe that it is a covenant. I do believe that it is a Counsel. The time before creation when the Triune God planned out Redemptive History. During the 17th Century the Theologians had Covenant on the brain and called everything a covnenant, even when it wasn't. I believe that first there was the "Counsel of Redemption" to plan out redemptive History by the Triune God. e.g. all the Before the Foundation verses. Secondly, the Covneant of works (Creation) was made between God and Man, Creator and creation. The covenant sign was the Tree of Life. Thirdly, the Covenant of Grace, which will be a everylasting covenant. It started with sin in the Garden and will last thru eternity. These are my thoughts, I could be wrong, But you must convince me that it is a covenant.

John Owen expressed that the agreement between the Father and the Son was a covenant because it was between two distinct persons with One issuing a commandment with a conditional promise and the Other agreeing to do the work with expectation of the promise being fulfilled. Owen said this was a covenant for this and the following reasons:



Because the Father called it a covenant:



The Father said: “I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, …My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. …My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” PSA 89:3 PSA 89:28 PSA 89:34



The Father asked the Son to do something with a promise attached if the Son agreed.



The Son agreed and performed His Father’s assignment. The Father then fulfilled His promise. This was the Father’s promise:



The Father said: "And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth… Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship…In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;"



The Son told His Father that He had finished the work He was sent to do and now wanted His Father’s promises fulfilled:



The Son said: "… I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. JOH 17:1, 4-6, 9-10, 20



The Son obeyed His Father’s commandments which He had given His Son before creation:



The Son said: “For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” JOH 12:49-50. JOH 10:18



Summary

The Father sent His Son to perform a work with a promise conditioned upon its successful completion. The Son completed the work successfully and expected the promised rewards. The Father fulfilled the promise and gave His Son all the promised rewards.



Now this is all revealed to us by the Holy Spirit in “an accommodating way” so our puny brains can begin to understand “heavenly things.” The Father and Son are one but distinct persons and the Father and Son’s will is always one so the Son would always agree with the Father and always does His will. There was never a chance of the Son’s disobedience (like Adam in his covenant with God), so we were always in good hands.



But God decided to perform this work in the form of a covenant so that, I believe, we could understand the importance of covenants with Him and with each other and all of which changed history forever.



I hope my awkwardness in explaining this does some justice to the biblical account, I’m sorry I’m not very good at biblical commentary and can’t compare to giants like Owen, Flavel, Calvin, Henry and others who have commented on this theology.

 

[Cal]

“We the People…” Covenantal Constitutionalism



God commanded the model of government instituted by Moses, with tribal elders moderating civil disputes and the Levitical priests enforcing the covenant within the confines of the Tabernacle.



Some have called this model the "Hebrew Commonwealth" and have seen our present constitutional model of government as based on this ideal. In fact, a sermon preached in 1788 had the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in mind: The Republic of the Israelites An Example to the American States by Samuel Langdon. Langdon was prominent in securing the adoption of the Constitution as a delegate to the New Hampshire state convention in 1788.



The New Hampshire Congregationalist minister argues that Deuteronomy 4:5 is a model for our American republic. Thus, in the words of Langdon, we have proof that some representatives who ratified our Constitution were men who believed that: "the Israelites may be considered as a pattern to the world in all ages; .... Let us therefore look over their constitution and laws, enquire into their practice, and observe how their prosperity and fame depended on their strict observance of the divine commands both as to their government and religion."



The Old Covenant basis for the representative congress, the senate, the judicial system, the order of military, the religious and ceremonial observances, the different and weaker forms of government which succeeded that commanded by Moses, and the complete revelation supplied by Jesus Christ, are all expounded on by Langdon and then applied to the newly birthed American Republic. There are comparisons between Moses as Israelite general and Washington as our military leader, the twelve tribes and our thirteen colonies. Soon after this sermon was published the U.S. Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire.



The Constitution was written by under the political theory of Federalism. The Latin word for Covenant is “Foedus” from which we get our word Federal. Our founders established a permanent union of states by a national covenant—the Constitution. Federalism is the principle that most powers should be decentralized among state and local governments, but that a few defined powers are delegated to a national government. James Madison described a federation when he said: “The powers delegated by the … Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” (The Federalist Papers) Jefferson said “the way to have good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but divide it among the many…”



Although it is true that there was a strong deistic influence at the time of the signing of the Declaration, there is no question that there were the residual effects of strong Puritan influence. The American Revolution could not have occurred without the 150-year-old Puritan foundation in America.



Thomas Jefferson, a man described by his contemporaries as "a French infidel in respect to religion," was indebted to the Puritans for his model of civil government. The evangelical explosion of the Great Awakening in Puritan New England provided the seeds for the first Baptist churches to be planted in Episcopal Virginia, which held to a Covenantal theology and a congregational form of church government. Jefferson gained his first clear idea of a republican government from seeing the congregationalism of a Baptist church in his vicinity. It was good politics, too, since he strengthened his state party's stance among the people through an alliance with the Baptists and all friends of religious freedom. (Joseph Tracy, The Great Awakening (Tappan and Dennet, Boston, 1842), pp. 419-420.)



Thomas Hooker was a leader in the area of government as well. In May of 1638 he was asked to address the General Court of Connecticut, which apparently had been given the responsibility of drafting a constitution. It was there he preached his famous sermon on Deuteronomy 1:13: Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you. "In this sermon he laid down three doctrines. Doctrine I. That the choice of public magistrates belongs unto the people by God's own allowance. Doctrine II. That the privilege of election which belongs unto the people must not be exercised according to their humor, but according to the blessed will of God. Doctrine III. That they who have the power to appoint officers and magistrates, it is in their power also to set the bounds of the power and the place unto which they call them." In January 1639 the "Fundamental Orders" were adopted, serving as the constitution of Connecticut. Historians have recognized Thomas Hooker’s leadership and influence in the final document.



Modern theonomists can neither completely defend the rigidity of the Massachusetts Bay Colony nor completely disparage the attempts towards a godly separation of powers by Roger Williams and the Rhode Island colony. A more honest approach would be to settle on the example of civil liberty found in the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut.

The United States Constitution owes allegiance to Thomas Hooker, more than any other man, for providing a working model of decentralized government, one which had not appeared on the face of the earth since the time of the ancient Hebrews.



The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut was the first biblical covenant in modern times, which founded a federal government. The Mayflower Compact was not a constitution, in that it did not define and limit the functions of government. The Magna Charta had the nature of a written constitution because it described the rights of the people, but it did not create a civil government.



This constitution states that Connecticut is submitted to the "Savior and Lord." There are none of the patronizing references to a "dread sovereign" or a "gracious king" nor the slightest allusion to the authority of British government or any other government over the colony. It presumes Connecticut to be self-governing. It does not describe church membership as a condition for suffrage. In this federation, all powers not granted to the General Court remained in the towns. Each township had equal representation in the General Court. The governor and the council were chosen by a majority vote of the people with almost universal suffrage.



In his sermon to the General Court, May 31, 1638, Hooker said, "The foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people...the choice of public magistrates belongs unto the people by God's own allowance...they who have power to appoint officers and magistrates have the right also to set the bounds and limitations of the power and place unto which they call them."



John Fiske writes: "It was the first written constitution known to history, that created a government, and it marked the beginnings of the American republic, of which Thomas Hooker deserves more than any other man to be called the father. The government of the United States today is in lineal descent more nearly related to that of Connecticut than to that of any of the other thirteen colonies."



Unless law is anchored in moral absolutes, Supreme Court Justice John Marshall's statement that the government of the United States is a "government of laws and not men" makes no sense. If there is no consensus as to what constitutes the law, often called the "Higher Law," and where it can be found, then we are governed by men and not laws. The colonists believed that this "Higher Law" was a definite thing and could be found in a particular place, namely the Bible, under whose commandments all would be equally subjected: "The right of freedom being a gift of God Almighty, ... the rights of the colonists as Christians ... may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the Great Law Giver ... which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament," wrote Samuel Adams, the great revolutionary organizer, in his 1772 classic of political history, The Rights of the Colonists.



The notion of the "Higher Law" goes all the way back to Moses, when Yahweh handed down His commandments to the people of Israel for their protection. God, through Moses, taught the Israelites how to live with each other, how to order their moral lives and their community, and how to please Him. Mosaic Law taught restraint, and conveyed Yahweh's wishes on how His children were to treat their fellow human beings, whether in person or through the instrument of the state. Jesus broadened the covenant to include Gentiles as well. The new covenant is spelled out in very clear terms in the New Testament. The word "covenant" refers, in the Bible, to an unbreakable contract between God and man; it is an eternal and cosmic constitution that governs our relationship with the Creator.



As writer and constitutional scholar John Whitehead points out, the idea of the "Higher Law" is closely connected to "common law," a legal term referring to Christian principles adapted to the legal structure of civil life. The phrase first entered the vocabulary of English lawyers of the 12th century, after King John at Runnymede was forced by Pope Innocent III, English landowners, and the "Army of God" to sign England's first written constitution, designed mainly to protect property rights. Magna Carta, or the Great Charter, is filled with such phrases as: "The King himself ought not to be under a man but under God and under the law, because the law makes the king for there is no king where will governs and not law." And: "Know ye that we, in the presence of God, and for the salvation of our souls, and the souls of all our ancestors and heirs, and unto the honor of God and the advancement of Holy Church... have in the first place granted to God, and by this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever."



The Continental Congress of the United States on October 14, 1774, issued its Declaration of Rights stating that the colonists of the several states were entitled to the protections of the common law of England. Everyone understood this as a reference to a legal tradition beginning five centuries earlier with Magna Carta, whose moral authority was firmly grounded in Christianity. Whitehead points out in The Second American Revolution that the phrase "common law" comes from jus cornmune, which was the canon law of the Catholic Church. "The usages of God's people and the institutes of our forefathers are to be held for the law," wrote Augustine (354-430); and William Blackstone, the great English legal theorist, rephrased the idea in 1765: "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of Revelation, depend all human laws," he wrote, articulating the common law principle, which has been with us since Moses brought the tablets down from Mount Sinai. Judges throughout English and American history, following the common law tradition, have often handed down decisions with explicit references to the Ten Commandments. James Madison, known as the father of the U.S. Constitution, put it this way: "We have staked the whole future of the American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future... upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

 

[Cal]

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION


The chief architect of the United States Constitution was James Madison. Although Madison’s early training is often ignored, it significantly influenced his writing of the Constitution. As a youth, he had studied under a Scottish Presbyterian, Donald Robertson, to whom Madison gave the credit for “all that I have been in life.” (John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of our Founding Fathers, 1987). Later he was trained in theology at Princeton under the Rev. John Witherspoon. Witherspoon’s Calvinism was an important source for Madison’s political ideas, (James H. Smylie, Madison and Witherspoon: Theological Roots of American Political Thought, 1995).


The key idea of the new Constitution was contained in the word federal, a term based in Calvinist theology. In the American colonies, the words federal and federal head were widely known and generally understood because of the widespread influence of Calvinist Christianity. In the 1780’s, to say that America was a federal government with a federal constitution immediately implied that Calvinist principles were being employed in forming the new union.



The English word federal comes from the Latin word foedus, which means permanent bond or union. Foedus was often used in the Latin Bible to translate the Hebrew word for “covenant.” The Puritans and other Calvinists affirmed a “federal” or covenant theology. The word federal in American culture was widely linked to the Puritans and to the Westminster Confession and Catechism (1646). In the New England states where Calvinism was particularly strong, many Christians viewed the Constitution through Calvinist lenses.



By 1787, federal political principles had been prevalent for some time, particularly in New England, due to the influence of the Puritans. There was a close connection between the political federalism of the New England and the covenant theology of the Puritans. As historian Robert Alley observed: “One can trace a direct movement from biblical covenant to church covenant to constitutions, whether state or federal.” (Robert S. Alley, James Madison on Religious Liberty, 1985).



When applied to the Constitution, the word federal signified two things. First, it referred to the nature of the new union. Second, it referred to the new way that the government was organized, and particularly to the relationship between the individual states and the whole American nation. The Founders called their new government a “federal government” and the constitution a “federal constitution.”



The Influence of Federalism

In Calvinist theology, Adam was called the “federal head,” or covenantal head of the human race. Adam’s fall into sin was said to bring guilt and death to the human race, and that the human race was federally or covenantally linked to him as their ancestor and federally united with his sin.



Nonetheless, within Calvinist theology the term federal head was applied preeminently to Jesus Christ. He is the “last Adam” and the new “federal head” of those redeemed. Because Christ replaces Adam as the federal head, Christians are no longer federally linked to Adam’s sin and guilt. Through the new covenant in Christ’s blood, Christian’s are federally linked to Christ’s righteousness.



The Puritan view of Christ as federal head implied that the covenant between Christ and Christian believers could never be broken. Therefore, in Calvinist theology, a federal union was an unbreakable union based on a sacred covenantal agreement. This secular use of the word reflected its Protestant, and especially Calvinist, background.



Preamble

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.


We the People—A compact of many speaking as one in covenant with each other. A wonderful imitation of The Trinitarian Covenant in Perfect Union.


Establish Justice—This is the first purpose of civil government as taught to us in Scripture.


DEU 16:18,20 "You shall appoint for yourself judges and officers in all your towns which the Lord your God is giving you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. Justice, and only justice, you shall pursue…

1PE 2:14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

ROM 13:4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

GEN 9:6 "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.

EXO 21:12 ¶ "He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.

LEV 24:17 ¶ 'If a man takes the life of any human being, he shall surely be put to death.


Insure Domestic Tranquility—The second purpose of civil government is also found in Scripture.


1TI 2:1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men,

1TI 2:2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.



Provide for the Common Defense—The protection of innocent human life is at the base of not only capital punishment, and domestic police force, but also in the provision for an army. The Scriptures also enlighten us on the role of government in these areas.


ROM 13:3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;

ROM 13:4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

God ordains the sword in Scripture to government to be any weapon used against anyone who practices evil.


Promote the General Welfare—Note the word promote as opposed to provide. Government is to promote the common good of all citizens. God expressly provides this for to governments in Scripture.


ROM 13:3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;

ROM 13:4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.


1PE 2:14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.


EST 10:3 For Mordecai the Jew was second only to King Ahasuerus, and great among the Jews and in favor with his many kinsmen, one who sought the good of his people and one who spoke for the welfare of his whole nation.


Secure the Blessings of Liberty—Blessing is indeed what liberty is, it is a blessing from God as the Declaration articulately indicated. The writers of the Constitution and the Declaration knew full well the importance of ensuring these words were included in our founding and governing documents. The reason being is that if liberty and our freedoms are derived from God, only God can take them away. A despot, tyrant, government or a majority can’t take them away, these rights are simply not theirs to take!

 

[Cal]

Government is ordained to secure liberty for the people.

JER 34:8 This is the word that came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, after that the king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people which were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty unto them;

Government secures liberty by passing laws to protect the freedoms of its citizens, such as laws against stealing (freedom to own property), murder (freedom to live), rape (freedom of marriage), etc. etc. This was the purpose of the ten commandments, to give the people freedom.

The Scriptures plainly teach that liberty and freedom comes from God alone:

EXO 20:2 ¶ "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

EXO 13:3 ¶ Moses said to the people, "Remember this day in which you went out from Egypt, from the house of slavery; for by a powerful hand the Lord brought you out from this place. And nothing leavened shall be eaten.

DEU 7:8 but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

2CO 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

ISA 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, Because the Lord has anointed me To bring good news to the afflicted; He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to captives And freedom to prisoners;

GAL 5:1 It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

GAL 5:13 ¶ For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.



The Constitution was written by under the political theory of Federalism. The Latin word for Covenant is “Foedus” from which we get our word Federal. Our founders established a permanent union of states by a national covenant—the Constitution. Federalism is the principle that most powers should be decentralized among state and local governments, but that a few defined powers are delegated to a national government. James Madison described a federation when he said: “The powers delegated by the … Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” (The Federalist Papers) Jefferson said “the way to have good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but divide it among the many…”



1st Amendment to the Constitution

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”



Besides being the principal author of the declaration of Independence, Jefferson is widely regarded as the official interpreter of the First Amendment. The phrase separation of church and state can be traced to Jefferson. It is in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association that Jefferson said the First Amendment erected a “wall of separation” between church and state.



Jefferson did not establish this principle to contain religion, instead, he believed, as did John Milton and John Locke, that true religion flourishes best when the civil authorities practice a hands-off policy.



Between 1777 and 1779, debate raged throughout Virginia over government taxation to support an established church and the state establishment of a church. In 1779 Thomas Jefferson was elected Governor of Virginia. He wrote a bill promoting religious liberty-The Statute for Religious Liberty. This bill was passed in 1786 after years of debate and it rejected the British and medieval approaches to religion that combined church and state. Instead, drawing from the stream of Christian thought that included the English Common Law and the Protestant Reformation, this bill stressed the creator-redeemer distinction of Luther and Calvin as well as the liberty of conscience inherent in the distinction.



It is interesting to note that the wording for The Statute for Religious Liberty came from petitions and memorials of Baptists and Presbyterians who wrote to Jefferson during the period Jefferson’s bill was under debate from 1777 to 1779, (Compare Lewis Peyton Little, Imprisoned Preachers and religious Liberty in Virginia: A Narrative Drawn Largely from the Official Records of Virginia Counties, Unpublished Manuscripts, Letters and Other Original Sources). They were afraid of the Anglican Church remaining the established church of Virginia and continuing to limit their freedom. They had no intention of pushing religion out of state affairs, but rather the state out of religious affairs. This was obviously Jefferson’s intent as well since he used their language in his bill.



There is a simple reason why Jefferson could comfortably use the term “wall of separation” when writing to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. The term was not an attack on Christianity or Christian principles. Indeed Jefferson knew that his Baptist friends would immediately recognize that the term was consistent with Baptist principles. Their denomination had been preaching the separation of church and state for two hundred years. Baptists were demanding such a separation long before Jefferson was born. Now their hard-fought principle was in the Virginia Constitution. From there it entered the federal Constitution as the First Amendment.



Perhaps the most conclusive historical demonstration of the fact that the Founders never intended the federal Constitution to establish today’s religion-free public arena is seen in the creation and passage of the “Northwest Ordinance.” That Ordinance (a federal law which legal texts consider as one of the four foundational, or “organic” laws) set forth the requirements of statehood for prospective territories. I received House approval on July 21, 1789; Senate approval on August 4, 1789 (this was the same Congress which was simultaneously framing the religion clauses of the First Amendment); and was signed into law by President George Washington on August 7, 1789.



Article III of that Ordinance is the only section to address either religion or public education, and in it, the Founders couple them, declaring:



“Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”



The Framers of the Ordinance—and thus the Framers of the First Amendment—believed that schools and educational systems were a proper means to encourage the “religion, morality, and knowledge” which they deemed so “necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind.”



Subsequent to the passage of the Ordinance, when a territory applied for admission as a State, Congress issued an “enabling act” establishing the provisions of the Ordinance as criteria for drafting a State constitution. For example, when Ohio territory applied for statehood in 1802, its enabling act required that Ohio form its government in a manner “not repugnant to the Ordinance.” Consequently, the Ohio constitution declared:



“Religion, morality, and knowledge being essentially necessary to the good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of instruction shall forever be encouraged by legislative provision.”



While this requirement originally applied to all territorial holdings of the United States in 1789 (the Northwest Territory—Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota), as more territory was gradually ceded to the United States (the Southern Territory—Mississippi and Alabama), Congress required that it form its government in a manner “not repugnant to the principles of the Ordinance.” Hence, the Mississippi constitution declared:



“Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to the good government, the preservation of liberty and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be forever encouraged in this State.”



Congress later extended the same requirements to the Missouri Territory (Missouri and Arkansas) and then on to subsequent territories. Consequently, the provision coupling religion and schools continued to appear in State constitutions for decades. For example, the 1858 Kansas constitution required:



“Religion, morality, and knowledge, however, being essential to good government, it shall be the duty of the legislature to pass suitable laws…to encourage schools and the means of instruction.”



Numerous other territorial papers and State constitutions—past and present—make it clear that the Founding Fathers never intended to separate religious instruction or religious activities from the public or official life of America.

 

[Cal]

10th Amendment to the Constitution


The Constitution does not make the states merely administrative arms of the national government. It establishes, in effect, a dual form of government—both the national government and the state governments having supreme authority over their defined areas of jurisdiction. Each sovereign government is held in check from encroaching on the other by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”



This article means the Constitution limits power to the Federal government to the express powers written in the Constitution, which are only 18 under Article 1, Section 8. This important division and separation of powers was destroyed by force in 1865 after the Civil War by the 14th Amendment. When the 14th Amendment was examined by the state legislatures, many of them (even some from the North) rejected it on the grounds that it would undermine the Founders’ idea of federalism on dual government. The problem was in paragraphs 1 and 5:



“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”



“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”



This broad and general language of what the States could not do could be used by enemies of Federalism to force the States by the power of Congress to do anything the Federal government wanted them to do. This provision is commonly referred to today to enforce Executive Orders by the President or by the federal courts. Under the guise of the 14th Amendment, outlawing the pledge of allegiance “under God” is trying to be forced on the states, abortion rights are forced on the states, outlawing of biblical teaching in public schools is forced on the states, etc. etc.



The northern states refused to listen to the serious objections of the southern states on the 14th Amendment and instead they declared the southern legislatures to be illegal governments due to their involvement in the Civil War and placed them under martial law. (If they were truly illegal, then the 13th Amendment freeing slaves ratified by them only 6 months earlier would also be illegal.) Once new legislatures were elected that would ratify the 14th Amendment, then they would enjoy their freedom once again.



The Radical Republicans responded with the Reconstruction Act of 1867, which expelled the Southern states from the Union and placed them under martial law. To end military rule, the Southern states were required to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment. As one Northern Republican described the situation: "the people of the South have rejected the constitutional amendment and therefore we will march upon them and force them to adopt it at the point of the bayonet."5 President Andrew Johnson saw the Reconstruction Act as "absolute despotism," a "bill of attainder against 9,000,000 people." In his veto message, Johnson stated that "Such a power ha[d] not been wielded by any Monarch in England for more than five hundred years." Sounding for all the world like Roger Pilon, Johnson asked, "Have we the power to establish and carry into execution a measure like this?" and answered, "Certainly not, if we derive our authority from the Constitution and if we are bound by the limitations which it imposes."



The [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] Republican Congress overrode Johnson's veto. Facing permanent military occupation, the South ratified. But not before New Jersey and Ohio, aghast at Republican tyranny, rescinded their previous ratifications of the amendment. Even with the fictional consent of the Southern states, the Republicans needed New Jersey and Ohio. No matter; by joint resolution, the Congress declared the amendment valid, and thus it--you'll excuse the phrasing--"passed into law."



In its 1868 Resolution deratifying the Fourteenth Amendment, New Jersey charged that the amendment would work a radical "enlarge[ment] of the judicial power." In fact, New Jersey suspected that the amendment itself was "made vague for the purpose of facilitating encroachment on the lives, liberties, and property of the people."15 Perhaps the Garden State was on to something.



Two other Amendments have also destroyed state powers the 16th and 17th Amendments. The 16th Amendment in 1913 gave Congress power to “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States…” Prior to this the, the federal budget was entirely provided by import and federal sales taxes collected by the states and turned over to Congress. Now the national government could bypass any accountability to the states as to their spending. So today states get much of their money from the federal government and with that they get strict controls on its use such as what curriculum to teach in public schools, abortion clinics, porno art, etc. etc.



The 17th Amendment, also passed in 1913, made it so that U.S. Senators would no longer be appointed by the state legislatures to represent their interests as a state, but would now be “elected by the people thereof.” Now, no one in Congress represents only his or her state. As a result, all Congressmen represent special-interest groups who will help in their re-election.



As a result Federalism or the National Covenant has taken a fatal blow. Thomas Jefferson warned long ago that “the true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest and best…[for] when all government…shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as …. Oppressive as the government from which we separated.” Jefferson also warned of allowing the federal judiciary too much power as it currently has today. Jefferson said;



“The germ of dissolution of our Federal government is in the constitution of the federal judiciary; an irresponsible body working like a gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the states, and the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy….The Constitution has erected no such tribunal.” (Both Jefferson quotes are from Cleon W. Skousen, The Making of America, 1985)



This American Constitutional concept was therefore a borrowed concept or better said, it was the building upon a previous concept from the Israeli Republic, that is a model of government taught to the Israeli’s by God Himself as recorded in the scriptures for all nations to model.

 

[seawolf_48]

Cal

Psa 89:1-4 Is the Covenant of Grace, not the Covenant of redemption. To establish the covenant with His seed the children of David, God made a covenant with Adam to make his seed overcome the serpents seed. I read that he made a covenant with his chosen with the Covenant of Grace in the Garden thru the New Jerusalem. Yes, the Counsel of Redemption ordered the covenant, but I still cannot make God two parties inorder to make a covenant.

 

[Cal]

Cal

Psa 89:1-4 Is the Covenant of Grace, not the Covenant of redemption. To establish the covenant with His seed the children of David, God made a covenant with Adam to make his seed overcome the serpents seed. I read that he made a covenant with his chosen with the Covenant of Grace in the Garden thru the New Jerusalem. Yes, the Counsel of Redemption ordered the covenant, but I still cannot make God two parties inorder to make a covenant.

But don't you agree that as two distinct persons the Father sent Christ on a mission with promised rewards upon fulfillment and that Christ agreed to come to do the will of His Father, fufilled His mission and was rewarded?

How does this covenant between two distinct persons in the trinity differ from covenants entered into between God and man and between men throughout history?

 

[billwald]

EXO 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

but:

7: And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.

Which covenant? The Mosiac Covenant, which had absolutely NOTHING to do with redemption. Not one verse. It was a social contract for people living in Nation Israel.

 

[billwald]

"Jefferson also warned of allowing the federal judiciary too much power as it currently has today."

Jefferson gave the Supremes ultimate authority. Was it stupidity or intentional?