Basic HTML Version
253
pactum salutis and the covenant of grace. It brings out the unity of the covenant in Christ, and
is advocated among others by Boston, Gib, Dick, A. Kuyper Sr., H. Kuyper, and A. Kuyper, Jr. The
third representation is more perspicuous, however, is easier to understand, and is therefore
more serviceable in a practical discussion of the doctrine of the covenant. It escapes a great
deal of confusion that is incidental to the other view, and is followed by the majority of
Reformed theologians, such as Mastricht, à Marck, Turretin, Witsius, Heppe, the Hodges,
Shedd, Vos, Bavinck, and Honig. There is no essential difference between these two
representations. Says Dr. Hodge: “There is no doctrinal difference between those who prefer
the one statement and those who prefer the other; between those who comprise all the facts
of Scripture relating to the subject under one covenant between God and Christ as the
representative of His people, and those who distribute them under two.”[Syst. Theol. II, p. 358;
cf. also Dabney, Lect. on Theol., p. 432; Bavinck, Geref. Dogm. III, p. 240] This being the case,
the third mode of representing the whole matter undoubtedly deserves the preference. But in
following it we should bear in mind what Shedd says: “Though this distinction (between the
covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace) is favored by Scripture statements, it does
not follow that there are two separate and independent covenants antithetic to the covenant
of works. The covenant of grace and redemption are two modes or phases of the one
evangelical covenant of mercy.”[Dogm. Theol. II, p. 360.]
B. SCRIPTURAL DATA FOR THE COVENANT OF REDEMPTION.
The name “counsel of peace” is derived from Zech. 6:13. Coccejus and others found in this
passage a reference to an agreement between the Father and the Son. This was clearly a
mistake, for the words refer to the union of the kingly and priestly offices in the Messiah. The
Scriptural character of the name cannot be maintained, but this, of course, does not detract
from the reality of the counsel of peace. The doctrine of this eternal counsel rests on the
following Scriptural basis.
1. Scripture clearly points to the fact that the plan of redemption was included in the eternal
decree or counsel of God, Eph. 1:4 ff.; 3:11; II Thess. 2:13; II Tim. 1:9; Jas. 2:5; I Pet. 1:2, etc.
Now we find that in the economy of redemption there is, in a sense, a division of labor: the
Father is the originator, the Son the executor, and the Holy Spirit the applier. This can only be
the result of a voluntary agreement among the persons of the Trinity, so that their internal
relations assume the form of a covenant life. In fact, it is exactly in the trinitarian life that we
find the archetype of the historical covenants, a covenant in the proper and fullest sense of the
word, the parties meeting on a footing of equality, a true suntheke.
2. There are passages of Scripture which not only point to the fact that the plan of God for the
salvation of sinners was eternal, Eph. 1:4; 3:9,11, but also indicate that it was of the nature of a