Basic HTML Version
283
natural, but above all, of his spiritual, descendants. Paul speaks of him as “the father of all them
that believe,” Rom. 4:11. It is clear that the word “father” can only be understood figuratively
here, for believers do not owe their spiritual life to Abraham. Says Dr. Hodge in his Commentary
of Romans (4:11): “The word father expresses community of character, and is often applied to
the head or founder of any school or class of men, whose character is determined by the
relation to the person so designated; as Gen. 4:20,21. . . . Believers are called the children of
Abraham, because of this identity of religious nature or character, as he stands out in Scripture
as the believer; and because it was with him that the covenant of grace, embracing all the
children of God, whether Jews or Gentiles, was re-enacted; and because they are his heirs,
inheriting the blessings promised to him.”
f. Finally, we must not lose sight of the fact that the stage of the Old Testament covenant
revelation which is most normative for us in the New Testament dispensation, is not that of the
Sinaitic covenant, but that of the covenant established with Abraham. The Sinaitic covenant is
an interlude, covering a period in which the real character of the covenant of grace, that is, its
free and gracious character, is somewhat eclipsed by all kinds of external ceremonies and forms
which, in connection with the theocratic life of Israel, placed the demands of the law
prominently in the foreground, cf. Gal. 3. In the covenant with Abraham, on the other hand, the
promise and the faith that responds to the promise are made emphatic.
4. THE SINAITIC COVENANT.
The covenant of Sinai was essentially the same as that established
with Abraham, though the form differed somewhat. This is not always recognized, and is not
recognized by present day dispensationalists. They insist on it that it was a different covenant,
not only in form but in essence. Scofield speaks of it as a legal covenant, a “conditional Mosaic
covenant of works,”[Ref. Bib., p. 95.] under which the point of testing was legal obedience as
the condition of salvation.[Ibid, p. 1115.] If that covenant was a covenant of works, it certainly
was not the covenant of grace. The reason why it is sometimes regarded as an entirely new
covenant is that Paul repeatedly refers to the law and the promise as forming an antithesis,
Rom. 4:13 ff.; Gal. 3:17. But it should be noted that the apostle does not contrast with the
covenant of Abraham the Sinaitic covenant as a whole, but only the law as it functioned in this
covenant, and this function only as it was misunderstood by the Jews. The only apparent
exception to that rule is Gal. 4:21 ff., where two covenants are indeed compared. But these are
not the Abrahamic and the Sinaitic covenants. The covenant that proceeds from Sinai and
centers in the earthly Jerusalem, is placed over against the covenant that proceeds from
heaven and centers in the Jerusalem that is above, that is, — the natural and the spiritual.
There are clear indications in Scripture that the covenant with Abraham was not supplanted by
the Sinaitic covenant, but remained in force. Even at Horeb the Lord reminded the people of