[Institutiones Theologicae Ex Optimis Autoribus Concinatae (ex officinâ Francisci Moyardi, 1658)]

Johannes Hoornbeek (4 November 1617, Haarlem – 23 August 1666, Leiden), was a Dutch Reformed theologian. He was a student and a follower of Gisbertus Voetius, writing with him on spiritual desertion. Like his teacher Voetieus, he was also later a professor of theology at the University of Leiden and University of Utrecht. The two universities were closely related in the 17th century, and both the teacher and his students participated in the intellectual “Utrecht Circle.” Another member of the circle was Hornbeek's student colleague Andreas Essenius. The circle was also known as De Voetiaanse Kring (The Voetian Circle), and it was one of the most influential intellectual circles of the Dutch second Reformation.

Table of Contents:

<aside>

CHAPTER VIII. CONCERNING THE COVENANT

</aside>

I. For the Sum of God’s Dealings with Men, It Pleased Him to Enter into a Covenant with Them: The First Was of the Law, the Second of the Gospel; That of Works, This of Grace; The Former Struck in Adam, the Latter Established in Christ.

Maccovius: A covenant betwixt God and men is a pact whereby God, of His own free will, doth promise some good unto men and, in return, bindeth them to perform those duties which He requireth of them. Its parts be twain: the promise of some good from God’s side, and the stipulation of duty from man’s side. For God doth freely promise some good, and again demandeth from us the duty to be rendered unto Him. And it is twofold: the covenant of works and the covenant of grace.

The covenant of works is that wherein God promiseth eternal life unto man, if he render obedience unto the law of works in all points perfect, with the threat of eternal death annexed if he fail to yield such perfect obedience. This covenant God did establish at the beginning with the first of mankind, Adam and Eve, in their state of primal integrity, as it is written, Genesis 2:17. And its sacraments were two: the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. From this covenant man fell straightway after creation through disobedience, becoming a breaker of the covenant and a liar, and was made subject unto death—spiritual, corporal, and eternal. This same covenant God did renew through Moses with the people of Israel, Exodus 19:5; Deuteronomy 5:2.

There followeth the covenant of grace, wherein God promiseth unto us that He will be our God freely, for Christ’s sake, and we, in turn, are bound to be His people.

Ames: The law, or covenant of God with man in creation, was this: “Do this, and thou shalt live; if thou do it not, thou shalt die the death.” In which words are contained:

1. The precept: “Do this.”
2. The promise joined thereto: “If thou do it, thou shalt live.”
3. The like threat: “If thou do it not, thou shalt die the death.”

The former covenant being broken, the second is called in the Scriptures the new covenant, Hebrews 8:8, 10; the covenant of life, salvation, and grace, Romans 4:16; Galatians 3:18. In the same sense, it is also named the Gospel, Romans 1:16; the good word of God, Hebrews 6:5; the faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation, 1 Timothy 1:15; the good doctrine, 1 Timothy 4:6; the word of life, Philippians 2:16; the word of reconciliation, 2 Corinthians 5:19; the Gospel of peace, Ephesians 2:17; 6:15; the Gospel of salvation, and the word of truth, Ephesians 1:13; the arm of God, Isaiah 53:1; the savor of life unto life, 2 Corinthians 2:16. It is called a covenant because it is a firm promise; for in the Scriptures, any steadfast statute, even concerning things without life, is termed a covenant, Jeremiah 33:20, 25: “My covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night; if my covenant be not with day and night, if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth.” Yet, seeing it consisteth in a free gift and is confirmed by the death of the giver, it is more properly called a testament than a covenant, Hebrews 9:16. This distinction, not found in the former, meaneth that the first is not so fitly called a testament as a covenant.

This new covenant differeth from the old in many ways:

1. In kind: For that was, as it were, a covenant of friendship betwixt the Creator and the creature; but this is one of reconciliation betwixt enemies.
2. In the efficient cause: For in that, it was an agreement of two parties, namely God and man; but in this, God alone maketh the covenant. For man, being now dead in sins, had no power to enter into a spiritual covenant with God. Yet if two parties be considered for the covenant’s nature, then God alone is the party assuming and establishing, and man the party assumed.
3. In the object: For that extended unto all men; but this pertaineth unto certain particular ones by a special regard. Though its proclamation be oft set forth broadly after the manner of men, yet by a peculiar right it belongeth and is directed unto those for whom God intendeth it, who are therefore called the children and heirs of this promise and salvation, Genesis 15; Acts 2:39; 3:25; Romans 4:16; 9:7-8; Galatians 3:21, 29. Even as to the promulgation and outward confederation, many are strangers, Ephesians 2:12.
4. In the principle or moving cause: For there, God acted by command from His wise and just counsel; but here, mercy alone hath place. There, indeed, some measure of grace shone forth in the appointing of the reward due to obedience, yet it was not properly guided by grace, and so not that, but this covenant was perfected—that is, it actually brought man unto blessedness.
5. In the foundation: Which in the former was man’s own strength, but in this, Christ Jesus.
6. In the matter or goods promised: For in that, God promised life only; but in this, righteousness also, and all the means of life, for to man now dead, not the continuation or perfection of life, but its very restoration was needful.
7. In the conditions: For that required perfect obedience of works, to be rendered by man’s own power afore any effect of the promise, that it might have the nature of merit toward it; but this demandeth no condition properly so called or antecedent, but only a subsequent or intermediate one, and that to be given by grace, that it may be a means of the same grace being perfected—which is the proper nature of faith.
8. In the effects: For that teacheth and showeth what is just; but this bestoweth righteousness itself. In that was the dead letter, deadly to the sinner; but in this is the life-giving Spirit, 2 Corinthians 3:6-8. Hence that never brought salvation unto any man, nor could it unto any sinner, but only death; but this, of itself and properly, bringeth death or condemnation unto none, but unto all who truly receive it, it bringeth certain salvation, verse 1.
9. In the adjunct of duration: For that is outdated with respect to those who partake of this new one; but this is everlasting, both in its own continuance, for it admitteth no end or change in substance, and in respect of those to whom it is given, for the grace of this covenant endureth forever with those once truly covenanted.

Maccovius: Here it may not unfitly be asked whether only the covenanted have a right unto the temporal goods of this life, or also those who are not covenanted?

Response: The right unto these temporal goods is twofold: civil and spiritual. The civil right is that which holdeth among men and resteth upon their laws and customs. In respect of this right, men are called lords of these or those temporal goods, whose possession they have gained in the court of men. Thus, the most mighty Turkish emperor is named lord of the greatest part of the earth this day. But the spiritual right is that which is valid and approved before God Himself. Such a right our first parent Adam had in the whole world afore his fall, but by sin he lost it, both for himself and his posterity; yet in Christ it is restored unto all the covenanted. And in this regard, the Turk and other infidels and wicked men are but usurpers of those things which they otherwise lawfully possess civilly.

II. It Is Called the Old and New Testament, but Not in One Sense; Either for the Law and the Gospel, Simply Considered and Opposed; or for the Various Economy and Period of the Doctrine of Salvation, Formerly Before Christ, Which Is the Old Testament, and Now After He Is Revealed, Which Is the New Testament; or Finally, for the Sacred Books of This and That Time and Testament.

Professor: They are called the Old and New Testament either properly or figuratively, and then in a broad or strict sense.

Properly: By the name of the Old Testament is signified the Law, as it was given through Moses unto the people of the Jews, promising life under the condition of perfect obedience, with the threat of a curse against transgressors. Opposed hereto, in its proper sense, is the New Testament, namely, the doctrine of spiritual grace and salvation, fully revealed by the Son of God from the bosom of the Father and published by the preaching of the Apostles; whereby is promised free righteousness and eternal life, through and for the death of the testator Christ, unto all who will believe in Him, through the grace He shall bestow.

In a broad sense: With the addition of palaias (old), the term diatheke (covenant) includeth the Law given through Moses, of which we have spoken, and the promise made unto Adam concerning the seed of the woman, repeated unto Abraham in his seed, in whom all nations should be blessed. This promise the Apostle expressly calleth, Galatians 3:17, “the covenant confirmed before,” and in Ephesians 2:12, “the covenants of promise.” But unto this promise is joined the Law given through Moses, insofar as they are comprehended under the broad meaning of the Old Testament, only so far as the Law is a schoolmaster unto Christ, Galatians 3:24. For what the moral law most strictly required of mankind, the ceremonial law proclaimed was exhibited only in Christ and His sacrifice; the political law served both, procuring outward order as was meet from the use of each. So also the New Testament is taken broadly for the doctrine of both grace and faith, and of repentance and gratitude, or new obedience, because the word of the Gospel is, “Repent ye, and believe the Gospel,” Mark 1:15. And thus it requireth faith in the Gospel and repentance, which twain necessarily draw with them new obedience, whereby we live worthily of God. In this sense the Gospel is understood when the Apostle saith he is separated to preach the Gospel of God, Romans 1:1; that God will judge according to my Gospel, Romans 2:16; and the like. Nothing hindereth but that the covenant of grace, or the promise made unto the fathers, clad in its pedagogical circumstances, may come under the name of the Old Testament, for there was somewhat in it to be renewed and antiquated. Thus Paul, Hebrews 8:13, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old,” taketh the first covenant for the whole worship of the old tabernacle, wherein the promise was surely contained and confirmed. The two testaments are so called not by division of genus into species, but of the subject according to accidents, for the same thing, remaining in kind and substance, is varied by the diverse manner of economy and administration, both on God’s part and man’s.

Figuratively: By metonymy, the Old and New Testament are named the books contained in the code of the Old Testament and the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists, as in human affairs the tablets and signs of testaments are called testaments, because the sacramental signs also take the same name of testament. Thus the Apostle, 2 Corinthians 3:14, speaketh of the veil remaining in the reading of the Old Testament. By analogy hereof, the reading of the Gospel may be called the reading of the New Testament, in which sense the name of the New Testament is commonly used for the code of the Gospels.

III. The Law Is the Rule of Universal Justice and Equity, First Impressed on Nature, Whence It Is Called Natural; Then Given and Repeated Through Moses, Which Is the Mosaic Moral Law.

Junius: Among the Latins, the word lex (law) cometh from legere, that is, to read or publish; among the Greeks, nomos from distributing to each his own; among the Hebrews, Torah, in turn from publishing, hath gained its name. We thus define it generally: Law is an ordinance of reason for the common good, from him who hath care of the community. Some laws are human, others divine. Human laws are made by men, whose nearest rule is twofold: one innate, which we call the natural law; the other revealed from heaven, which we call divine. If they stray from these, they are corrupt, though commonly so named. We must treat only of the divine laws according to our purpose.

Professor: The natural law is the light and dictate of right reason in man’s understanding, informing him by prolepseis or common notions unto the distinction of just and unjust, honest and dishonest, that he may know what is to be done or shunned. Of these notions, some are primary, which we call practical principles; others secondary, which we call conclusions built from those principles with the aid of reason. Therefore, Paul saith that the law of God was acknowledged by the Gentiles, once given over to impiety and injustice, Romans 1:32, and the work of the law written in their hearts, Romans 2:14.

IV. The Mosaic Law Is Threefold: Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial.