John Calvin (1509-1564): “When the prophet, for his own encouragement, sets before himself the eternity of God, it seems, at first sight, to be a far-fetched consolation; for what benefit will accrue to us from the fact that God sits immutable on his heavenly throne, when, at the same time, our frail and perishing condition does not permit us to continue unmoved for a single moment? And, what is more, this knowledge of the blessed repose enjoyed by God enables us the better to perceive that our life is a mere illusion. But the inspired writer, calling to remembrance the promises by which God had declared that he would make the Church the object of his special care, and particularly that remarkable article of the covenant, ‘I will dwell in the midst of you’ (Exodus 25:8), and, trusting to that sacred and indissoluble bond, has no hesitation in representing all the godly languishing, though they were in a state of suffering and wretchedness, as partakers of this celestial glory in which God dwells. The word ‘memorial’ is also to be viewed in the same light. What advantage would we derive from this eternity and immutability of God’s being, unless we had in our hearts the knowledge of him, which, produced by his gracious covenant, begets in us the confidence arising from a mutual relationship between him and us? The meaning then is, ‘We are like withered grass, we are decaying every moment, we are not far from death, yea rather, we are, as it were, already dwelling in the grave; but since thou, O God! hast made a covenant with us, by which thou hast promised to protect and defend thine own people, and hast brought thyself into a gracious relation to us, giving us the fullest assurance that thou wilt always dwell in the midst of us, instead of desponding, we must be of good courage; and although we may see only ground for despair if we depend upon ourselves, we ought nevertheless to lift up our minds to the heavenly throne, from which thou wilt at length stretch forth thy hand to help us.’ Whoever is in a moderate degree acquainted with the sacred writings, will readily acknowledge that whenever we are besieged with death, in a variety of forms, we should reason thus: As God continues unchangeably the same—’without variableness or shadow of turning’—nothing can hinder him from aiding us; and this he will do, because we have his word, by which he has laid himself under obligation to us, and because he has deposited with us his own memorial, which contains in it a sacred and indissoluble bond of fellowship” (Comm. on Ps. 102:12; italics supplied).
David Dickson (1583–1663): “The covenanting of God with man, tended of its own nature to man’s good and happiness … because a singular respect and honour was put upon man, when he was made a confederate friend of God: for, if it be an honour to a mean and poor man to be joined with a King or Prince in a formal bond of mutual friendship, how much greater honour is it unto man, to be joined in a bond of mutual love and friendship with God?” (Therapeutica Sacra [1695], chapter 5).
Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669): “The Covenant of God is none other than God’s declaration of the way in which the divine love can be obtained and communion and fellowship with Him can be established. If a man walks in this way, he is in God’s friendship [Summa Doctrinae de Foedere et Testamento Dei (1648), 5].”
“[Johannes] Cocceius [1603-1669] defined the covenant as ‘nothing other than a divine declaration of the way (ratio) of perceiving the love of God and of obtaining union and communion or friendship with Him’ [Summa Doctrinae de Foedere et Testamento Dei (1648), 5]. This is the ultimate goal of salvation history … In several passages in Cocceius’ main systematic works, the Summa Doctrinae and the Summa Theologiae, he used the term ‘friendship with God’ (amicitia Dei) in order to conceptualize the ultimate covenantal relationship with God [Summa Theologiae (1662), 22, 18, 19; Summa Doctrinae de Foedere et Testamento Dei (1648), 5, 10, 12, 48] … he labelled the sacraments of the covenant of grace as the ‘testimonies of God’s friendship’ (testimonia amicitiae) par excellence [Summa Doctrinae de Foedere et Testamento Dei (1648), 201; cf. Summa Theologiae (1662), 53, 1]. The sacraments are the means by which this intimate friendship with God is experienced … In prayer, Cocceius argued, God and His human creatures enjoy each other’s company ‘as a friend enjoys his friend and shares everything which is good with him’. In prayer God and man can converse with each other in an intimate relationship [In librum Iobi Commentarius (1644), 29, 16] … In his exposition of John 15:15 (‘I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you’), Cocceius proceeds to eulogize this intimate friendship between Christ and His Church. The friendship of Christ does not mean that He simply subjects others unto Himself in order to enjoy them, but rather that He gives Himself freely to others so that they can enjoy communion with Him” (W. J. van Asselt, “Amicitia Dei as Ultimate Reality: An Outline of the Covenant Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669),” Ultimate Reality and Meaning 21 [1998], pp. 38-39, 42, 43, 44-45).
Charles Greig M’Crie (1836-1910): “Detailed descriptions of redemption as a bargain entered into between the first and second Persons of the Trinity in which conditions were laid down, promises held out, and pledges given, the reducing of salvation to a mercantile arrangement between God and the sinner, in which the latter signifies contentment to enter into a relation of grace, so that ever after the contented, contracting part can say, ‘Lord, let it be a bargain’, — such presentations have obviously a tendency to reduce the Gospel of the grace of God to the level of a legal compact entered into between two independent and, so far as right or status is concerned, two equal parties. The blessedness of the mercy-seat is in danger of being lost sight of in the bargaining of the marketplace; the simple story of salvation is thrown into the crucible of the logic of the schools and it emerges in the form of a syllogism” (The Confessions of the Church of Scotland: Their Evolution in History [Edinburgh: Macniven & Wallace, 1907], pp. 72-73).
John Murray (1898-1975): “How totally foreign to the notion of compact, contract, or agreement is the disposition or dispensation which can be illustrated in respect of its effective operation by a last will! This occasional use of diatheke [i.e., covenant] as testament [Heb. 9:16-17] cannot comport with a concept of covenant which in any way derives its definition from the idea of mutual agreement … From the beginning of God’s disclosures to men in terms of covenant we find a unity of conception which is to the effect that a divine covenant is a sovereign administration of grace and of promise. It is not compact or contract or agreement that provides the constitutive or governing idea but that of dispensation in the sense of disposition … And when we remember that covenant is not only bestowment of grace, not only oath-bound promise, but also relationship with God in that which is the crown and goal of the whole process of religion, namely, union and communion with God, we discover again that the new covenant brings this relationship also to the highest level of [divine] achievement. At the centre of covenant revelation as its constant refrain is the assurance ‘I will be your God, and ye shall be my people’” (The Covenant of Grace: A Biblico-Theological Study [London: Tyndale Press, 1954], pp. 30-32).
O. Palmer Robertson (1937-):
[1] “A long history has marked the analysis of the covenants in terms of mutual compacts or contracts. But recent scholarship has established rather certainly the sovereign character of the administration of the divine covenants in Scripture. Both biblical and extra-biblical evidence point to the unilateral form of covenantal establishment. No such thing as bargaining, bartering, or contracting characterizes the divine covenants of Scripture. The sovereign Lord of heaven and earth dictates the terms of his covenant” (The Christ of the Covenants [Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 1980], p. 15).
[2] “In its most essential aspect, a covenant is that which binds people together. Nothing lies closer to the heart of the biblical concept of the covenant than the imagery of a bond inviolable … the contextual usage of the term [‘covenant’] in Scripture points rather consistently to the concept of a ‘bond’ or ‘relationship’ … The formalizing element essential for the establishing of all divine covenants in Scripture is a verbalized declaration of the character of the bond being established. God speaks to establish his covenant. He speaks graciously to commit himself to his creatures, and to declare the basis on which he shall relate to his creation. The prominence of oaths and signs in the divine covenants underlines the fact that a covenant in its essence is a bond” (The Christ of the Covenants [Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 1980], pp. 4, 5, 6).
For further explanation and quotes, see “John Calvin’s Integrated Covenant Theology (2): The Nature of the Covenant.”
