Christ and the Law: More from Samuel Petto

If the Lord be God to any, it is in Christ; if their inquities be forgiven, it is in the blood of Christ; if the divine law be written in their hearts, it is by the finger of the spirit of Christ.

Samuel Petto, The Great Mystery of the Covenant of Grace, p. 72

Doubtless men are obliged, at all times, to let the streams of their love run towards God; to love him with all their heart, with all their soul, with all their mind, and to love their neighbour as themselves...the fulfilling of these is the keeping of the law.

Christians are under the law, but it is to Christ, 1 Cor. ix. 21. They take it not from the hand of Moses, in its terror and rigour, but from the hand of Jesus Christ, who has redeemed from the curse of it.

Samuel Petto, The Great Mystery of the Covenant of Grace, p. 154-5

Every line is suffused with wonder

"The gospel is not so much a miracle as a marvel,
and every line is suffused with wonder"
Roland Bainton

In reading Bainton's biography of Luther this morning this sentence caught my eye. It is a wonder, beyond our thankful words ever to adequately express, that God should love sinners so much that he gave his Son for us. Not to marvel at this shows how little, experimentally, we understand the majesty and holiness of God and the wickedness of our own souls.

When poor souls hear the tidings of covenant love in the heart of God towards them, they are ready to suspect it is too good news to be true; are apt to be incredulous here, are hardly persuaded to believe the truth thereof, at least as to themselves: now Jesus Christ condescends so far, as to take upon him the office of a witness, to assure of the truth of all; now he is in heaven, he does not throw up that office, he continues still in this work, and sends down news from heaven thereof Revel. i. 5. and iii. 14.

He is the faithful witness still; as if he should say, I lay in the bosom of the Father, I have seen all transactions, all passages, I know how the heart of God stands toward this covenant work; if my word may have credit with you, I testify (says Jesus Christ) that the Father is real herein, and the work is done, the covenant is struck, ratified and sealed with my blood.

Samuel Petto, The Great Mystery of the Covenant of Grace, p. 74-5

Don't mix up your covenants

Whilst on holiday I have ben reading Samuel Petto and have found him to be full of insight. The following is his 1673 work, with a recommendation from John Owen, The Great Mystery of the Covenant of Grace:

...when the children of Israel had sinned egregiously in making the calf, and the Lord severely threatened even to consume them, Exod. xxxii. 10, 11. Moses, in interceding for them, does not plead the covenant newly made at Mount Sinai, but that with Abraham--verse 13. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swearest etc. &c.

He saw he could not ground his plea upon the Sinai covenant, already violated by them, and, therefore he flees to another, founded upon free grace. So, Deut. ix. 27. 2 Kings xiii. 23. The Lord was gracious to them, and had compassion on them, and had respect to them.

He does not say, because of his covenant with Moses at mount Sinai, but because of his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, &c.; so that whilst the Sinai covenant was in force, yet that with Abraham (which went before) was not swallowed up or mixed in it, but remained entire and distinct still, dispensing out blessings to the subjects of it; they were not one and the same covenant in that day.

O then let Christians beware of mixing and confounding the old and new covenants, which are so distinct. It is the great design of the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians to beat off from this mixture: both have their great use, but they must have their due place--Gal. iv. 24.

Samuel Petto, The Great Mystery of the Covenant of Grace, p. 109

Don't look in the wrong place

Samuel Bolton on law, gospel, justification and assurance:

Alas, there are multitudes in the world who make a Christ of their own works, and this is their undoing. They look for righteousness and acceptance more in the precept than in the promise, in the law rather than in the Gospel, more in working than in believing...There is something of this spirit in us all; otherwise we should not be up and down so much in respect of our comforts and out faith, as is still so often the case.

The True Bounds of Christian Freedom, p. 70

Old Testament saints saved by faith in Christ: Turretin on the unity of the covenant of grace

According to Turretin the Socinians, Remonstrants and Anabaptists held that “the fathers of the Old Testament were not saved by the gratuitous mercy of God in Christ, the Mediator (God-man, theanthropo) through faith in him about to come.” (5^th Q: I).

Turretin grants that there were differences in the administration of the covenant of grace in the Old Testament and the New but that it was the same in substance and essential parts. The issue is one of continuity of content:

Whether the same Mediator (Christ) in both; the same faith in Christ; promises of the same spiritual and heavenly blessings; the same way of reconciliation and salvation—the economy and administration only of the covenant varying. This our opponents deny; we affirm. (5^th Q: V)

The question is not whether the fathers of the Old Testament were saved, whether their sins were pardoned, whether they had any hope of eternal life, whether Christ was predicted to them. Most of our adversaries do not dare to deny this. Rather the question is whether they looked to Christ and were saved in the hope of his coming. Whether promises not only temporal, but also spiritual and heavenly concerning eternal life and the Holy Spirit were given to them. And whether the same covenant entered into with us in Christ had already been contracted with them, although more obscurely and reservedly.

We maintain that Christ was not only predicted but also promised to the fathers and by his grace they were saved under the Old Testament no less than we are saved under the New; nor was any name given under heaven from which salvation could be hoped for (Acts 4:12) and that too according to the inviolable promise of the gratuitous covenant. (5^th Q: VI)

Here are some extracts from his exposition and defence of the unity of the covenant of grace:

It is also falsely alleged that the words “There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12) refer only to the time in which Christ was manifested and cannot be extended to the past.

...since no salvation can be granted to the sinner without a mediator (and there is no mediator except Christ), it follows either that the fathers had no salvation or that they were saved by Christ. (5^th Q: XII)

Peter testifies, “To Christ give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43). Nor can it be objected that the faith of the ancients was general in God, not special in Christ (the Saviour), because the opposite is evident from many considerations.

(a) No faith can be saving unless founded upon Christ.

(b) He speaks of the faith by which they looked to God as their God (Heb. 11:16) and to heaven as their native country. Now this cannot be done without Christ.

(c) Of the faith by which they looked to Christ himself and preferred his reproach to all treasures (Heb. 11:26). (d) Not only a general but also a special command of faith in Christ is found in the Old Testament (Exod. 23:20-21; Deut. 18:18; Ps. 2:12; Is. 53:1, 5). If the faith of the ancients were not the same as ours, it would be improperly proposed for our imitation (Heb. 12:1, 2; Rom. 4:12). Paul could not argue with sufficient strength from the faith of the father of believers and his justification to ours (Gal. 3:6, 7; Rom. 4:16). (5^th Q: XIV)

It cannot be objected:

(1) as to the promises concerning Christ in the Old Testament that they were indeed given to the fathers, but not for the fathers; rather for the believers of the New Testament, as the promises of the calling of the Gentiles were given to the ancients, but only for the time of the New Testament.

(a) It is absurd that the prophets should have given such promises to believers and that believers heard them and did not apply them to themselves. For they were oppressed by the same evils as others for whom they are supposed to have been made and equally in need of the same remedy. Since they were sent to the ancient people in order to sustain them in the hope of the Messiah about to come and of the salvation to be obtained through him, who does not see that such promises were given to the fathers for their consolation?

(b) The promises belonged to them in the same manner as the adoption, glory, the covenants, the giving of the law and the service of God (Rom. 9:4)

(c) If the promises did not pertain to them, they could not and ought not to have applied them to themselves, as was done by Abraham (Gen. 15:6), who also was justified in this way (Rom. 4:4); by Jacob (Gen. 49:18); by David (Pss. 16, 23, 40, 110, 118 and frequently elsewhere); by Isaiah (Is. 9:6-- “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given”) and by the whole Israelite church (Is. 53:11). (5^th Q: XVI)