The Covenant of Redemption

Driving home: But the precise issue is this. Did Christ die for all men indiscriminately and discreetly, or did he die for a certain number of men particularly and exclusively, or more simply, for whom did Christ die, placing upon tha…

Martin quotes Hugh Martin to emphasize that discussing any scriptural doctrine, especially the extent of the atonement, outside the larger category of the doctrine of the Son of God, robs it of protection and illustration, making it harder to defend.

We are not discussing whether there is a sincere offer made of the benefits of Christ's death to all men who come within the compass of the gospel, or whether or not there are manifold fruits accruing to all men from the death of Christ. But the precise issue is this. Did Christ die for all men indiscriminately and discreetly, or did he die for a certain number of men particularly and exclusively, or more simply, for whom did Christ die, placing upon that word die the full implication of its biblical significance. Then, secondly, I tried to describe the approach by which we would address ourse...

0:36 - 2:04 Read in full sermon

The point: Be a student of words all your days, ensuring your dictionary is as well-worn as your Bible for accurate communication.

Martin uses the analogy of words as 'vehicles of thought' to stress the importance of precise definitions in theological discussion, stating that imprecise words lead to blurred thought.

For want of this, there is much confusion, wrong impressions, and oft times imprecision of thought and unnecessary debate. You see, words are the vehicles of thought. If the words are not precise, the thought will be blurred. Now, never forget that.

4:59 - 5:17 Read in full sermon

The point: Be a student of words all your days, ensuring your dictionary is as well-worn as your Bible for accurate communication.

Martin uses the analogy of a dictionary and Bible being 'constant companions' and equally 'well worn out' to illustrate the commitment to accuracy of communication required of anyone who preaches or teaches.

In any kind of discussion, in any kind of opportunity that you have to preach or to teach, words are the tools of communication, and anyone concerned with accurate communication must be a student of words all his days. If your dictionary is not almost as well worn out as your Bible, you are not concerned with accuracy of communication. Your dictionary and your Bible ought to be your constant companions. So, at the very outset, we must define precisely our terms.

5:17 - 5:50 Read in full sermon

The point: Be a student of words all your days, ensuring your dictionary is as well-worn as your Bible for accurate communication.

Martin uses the example of 'Trinity' and 'two natures of Christ' as non-biblical terms that are nonetheless essential for expressing the collation of biblical data, justifying the use of 'covenant of redemption'.

Now, the term, covenant of redemption, is not a biblical term, as are such terms as sacrifice, redemption, reconciliation, propitiation, etc. But, as you've often been reminded, neither is the word trinity a biblical term, or, to relate to the Sunday morning messages, two natures of Christ. That's not a biblical term. But these terms, though not biblical in themselves, are essential if we are to express the fruit of our collating of biblical data.

5:50 - 6:24 Read in full sermon

The point: Be a student of words all your days, ensuring your dictionary is as well-worn as your Bible for accurate communication.

Martin uses the analogy of putting together biblical facts (one God, Father is God, Son is God, Spirit is God) to form a 'verbal symbol' like 'Trinity in unity,' explaining how the term 'covenant of redemption' functions similarly.

God gives us a fact here, and a fact here, and a fact here, and when we seek to put them together, the fruit of that collation of biblical data has to be expressed in some kind of a verbal symbol. So, when we take the fact that there is one God, the fact that Jesus Christ is recognized as God, the Father is recognized as God, the Spirit is recognized as God, we put all those together and we say the Bible contains a doctrine of trinity in unity. One God in three persons, three persons who compose the one God. Well, this is what we're dealing with when we come to the term covenant of redemption.

6:24 - 7:08 Read in full sermon

The point: If you are a teacher of others, do not isolate the death of Christ from the covenant of redemption, lest you rob that death of its richness and the people of God of its consolations.

Martin recounts Hugh Martin's lament about Scottish divines being influenced by German theology, losing appreciation for the doctrine of the covenant of redemption, and the resulting impoverishment of the people, to underscore the pastoral importance of the doctrine.

Well if that's so then most of us would have to change the date of our salvation at least as we understand when we were brought out of death into life. No we are not saying I am not asserting that a person cannot have a saving embrace of Christ crucified unless he is knowledgeable in the covenant of redemption. But what I am saying is that if we are coming to grips with something of a comprehensive consideration of the death of Christ any such consideration is woefully inadequate if it does not come to grips at the outset with the biblical doctrine concerning the covenant of redemption. And to...

17:35 - 19:03 Read in full sermon

Driving home: But John 1.1 is a clear statement to the fact that the actings of the Godhead as one in three and three in one are of eternal reality.

Martin uses the analogy of 'New Testament glasses' to explain how the full revelation of the Trinity through the Incarnation allows believers to look back and discern hints of the Trinity in Old Testament passages that might not have been clear to those living at that time.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God literally towards God. There was this face to face relationship may I say it reverently there was personal intercommunion and the Word was God. And from the full manifestation of the doctrine of the Trinity we can then look back with New Testament glasses and see things we could never see with the unaided eye if we were in the Old Testament as it unfolded. And we can see those hints of the doctrine of the Trinity and the whole rich teaching concerning the angel of Jehovah the pluralism of some of those passages.

21:51 - 22:35 Read in full sermon

Driving home: But John 1.1 is a clear statement to the fact that the actings of the Godhead as one in three and three in one are of eternal reality.

Martin uses the analogy of launching a project and trying to get ten people to agree, some immediately and others through persuasion, to illustrate how *not* to think about the unity of mind and will within the Godhead.

We might launch a project and try to get ten people to agree with us and three do immediately and the others we give them a bill of goods and we persuade them and we finally get them to come on. We must never think that way. If the scriptures show that certain things are attributed more to the activity of the Father it is of the Father of the Triune Godhead. The Godhead in which there is but one mind in which there is but one will.

24:47 - 25:16 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: Martin demonstrates from 2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2, and Ephesians 1:4 that God's plan to save a people was an eternal design, not an afterthought. He then poses the question of…

Martin uses Paul's writing in Ephesians 1 as an example of 'eulogizing theologizing,' where praise and worship are 'bristling with lofty theological thought,' showing that deep doctrine leads to fervent worship.

Ephesians 1, the apostle is giving this great eulogy. He's theologizing by eulogizing. Some of you who were with us for the expositions of this chapter a number of years ago remember how we made a constant point of that. Here's a man who in his eulogizing theologizes.

28:57 - 29:15 Read in full sermon

Driving home: Whatever Christ did he designed to do. And whatever he designed to do he designed because he had been designated to it.

Martin quotes Hugh Martin's 'classic statement' that 'Whatever Christ did he designed to do. And whatever he designed to do he designed because he had been designated to it,' to argue that Christ's work is rooted in a full, complete covenant with the Father.

No scheme whatever that should be true to the leading contents of Scripture concerning the work of the Incarnate Redeemer can we possibly avoid coming to the conclusion that he acts according to a covenant with the Father. Now here's the statement. It's a classic statement. Whatever Christ did he designed to do.

44:32 - 44:52 Read in full sermon

In this part of the sermon: Martin details the Father's specific promises to the Son if he fulfills his responsibilities, including preparing a true humanity (Psalm 40, Hebrews 10), upholding him in his work…

Martin uses the analogy of the Old Covenant rituals and sacrifices being 'just a shadow of the reality' (Christ) to explain that the eternal realities always existed in Christ, and the Old Testament was merely a reflection.

Now turning over to Hebrews chapter 10 we have one of the most vivid descriptions of the commitment of the various persons of the Godhead with reference to the salvation of men establishing in the early part of this chapter that the law that economy under Moses with its ritual of sacrifice and intercession and all the rest was just a shadow of the reality just a shadow the realities were always in Christ the old covenants just a shadow don't think of it the other way around they were they were substantial and what we now have is a reflection no no they were the reflection they were the shadow ...

48:12 - 49:40 Read in full sermon

The point: Find comfort and certainty in the knowledge that your salvation is undergirded by the impregnable wall of the covenant of redemption, ordered in all things and sure.

Martin recounts the story of 'little teenage girls' among the Scottish Covenanters who went to the stake and drowned slowly rather than deny Christ, attributing their courage to their deep knowledge of the 'grand truth' of the covenant of redemption as an 'impregnable wall' of security.

and the Spirit are committing themselves to the salvation of a distinct people logically God's choice must precede this covenant Christ commits himself to be sure he for a specific people and when I realize that every blessing of grace that I have tasted has come to me as the fruit of my due to that covenant commitment then the certainty with which I can plead with God for the fulfillment of all his designs in me is a certainty undergirded by the knowledge of covenant fidelity you talk about making men out of boys when the people of God have in their spiritual bloodstream this is what made tho...

64:26 - 65:55 Read in full sermon