Definition.
The doctrine of republication is a Reformed theological concept suggesting that the Mosaic covenant, in some sense[1], republished the covenant of works made with Adam.
The OPC report on republication defines it as, “the re-presentation of a prior state of affairs, or principles, or laws, at a later period… republication is the idea that the Adamic covenant of works is presented a second time, with varying degrees of modification, in the Mosaic covenant.” [2]
Brenton C. Ferry writes, “The Reformed tradition recognises a principle of republication operating between the covenant of works and the Mosaic covenant, as if to say one is somehow like the other.” [3]
The Debate.
As you can appreciate, the more any given covenantal system tends towards understanding the Mosaic covenant as gracious in nature, the more it will tend towards opposing the doctrine of republication. Conversely, the more any covenantal system tends towards understanding the Mosaic covenant as conditional, the more it will tend towards affirming it.
Given the different views of the Mosaic covenant within Reformed theology, debate on this subject is inevitable.
On the one hand, the biblical basis of this doctrine has ensured that the Reformed tradition has made repeated and sustained reference to this truth, while on the other, it is forced to deny the full extent of the doctrine to remain within its own confessional bounds. The OPC report on republication, for example, concludes that all forms of substantial republication fall outside of their confession, while “Administrative republication is consistent with our standards in that it coherently maintains that the Mosaic covenant is in substance a covenant of grace.” [4]
While not anti-confessional, Dispensational Federalists believe that this particular confessional restriction creates a significant theological limitation. Full access to the biblical doctrine of republication is subsequently hindered.
What is the Biblical Basis?
John Owen believed that the Mosaic covenant was, ‘no other but the covenant of works revived.’ [5] He saw in the Mosaic covenant, ‘the nature of that first covenant’,[6] meaning the covenant of works made with Adam before the fall, where all the, ‘inexorableness as unto perfect obedience, was represented.’ [7] He believed that the Mosaic Covenant, ‘revived the sanction of the first covenant, in the curse or sentence of death’ [8] and that it also, ‘revived the promise of that covenant, that of eternal life upon perfect obedience.’ [9]
Owen could make these claims because of the clear biblical basis.
Perhaps the best way to see this is to observe that the covenant of works and the Mosaic covenant both share several biblical similarities.
The Same Moral Standard
At creation, man was made in the “image” and “likeness” of God, and a divine summary of the moral law was written into the heart of man (Genesis 1:26-27).
In the Mosaic covenant, a divine summary of the moral law was received on two tablets of stone (Exodus 24:12, 34:28). The same moral standard was the basis of both arrangements.
The Same Requirement of Perfect Obedience
At creation God made man “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Perfect obedience was required to avoid falling from this state of sinlessness.
In the Mosaic covenant, the same requirement of perfect obedience was required as they were commanded to, “abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them” (Deuteronomy 27:26, Galatians 3:10). In similar fashion, the people of Israel stood at the foot of Mount Sinai and promised, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.” The law even promised that “it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to do all this commandment before the Lord our God” (Deuteronomy 6:25), which is nothing but an Old Testament way of saying, if you keep the law perfectly, you will be justified by works.
The Same Curse of Death
At creation God placed, “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil … in the midst of the garden” (Genesis 2:9), and threatened Adam with the curse of death for disobedience by saying, “in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:17).
In the Mosaic covenant, the same curse of death is republished, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them” (Deuteronomy 27:26, Galatians 3:10).
The Same Promise of Eternal Life
At creation God also placed, “the tree of life” in “the midst of the garden” (Genesis 2:9) which was associated with a promise of eternal life. Immediately following the fall, we read that, “He drove out the man” (Genesis 3:24), “lest he… take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever” (Genesis 3:22).
In the Mosaic covenant, the same promise of eternal life is repeated. Moses writes that, “if a person does them, he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5). Paul also writes about the “commandment that promised life” (Romans 7:10), and Jesus said, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17, see also Luke 10:25-28).
The Same Principle of Works
At creation the blessings and curses detailed above were conditioned upon Adam’s personal obedience or disobedience (Genesis 2:17, 3:22). This gives the nature of a covenant of works.
In the Mosaic covenant we have seen the same features, a conditional covenant with the same blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. The Mosaic covenant, therefore, operates on the same works principle and shares the same nature as the covenant of works (Galatians 3:12).
The Same Respect unto a Federal Head as to its Undertaking
At creation, God made a covenant with Adam whereby his obedience or disobedience would be imputed to those he represents, “by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners” (Romans 5:19).
In the Mosaic covenant the whole nation was bound to the requirement of perfect personal obedience, which condition they broke (Exodus 32:7-8, Jeremiah 31:32), however, the law ultimately had a Christological focus. The scriptures announce that in the fullness of time God sent forth his Son, who was said to be, “born under the law” (Galatians 4:4). In this we understand that the heavy yoke of perfect personal obedience also fell on the shoulders of our Lord Jesus, which condition he fulfilled as a federal head for all those he represents, “by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:18-19, see also 1 Corinthians 15:22). The penal sanctions of the Mosaic covenant also demonstrate the ultimately Christological focus of the law covenant when we read, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21:23, Galatians 3:13). From this we can see that the Mosaic covenant and the covenant of works both share the same respect unto a Federal Head as to its undertaking.
Just as in creation, when the stage was set for the first Adam’s failure, so too in the Mosaic covenant, the stage was re-set for the second Adam’s success. This is exactly what we would expect to see. Federal theology comprehends the unfolding narrative of the two federal heads of humanity. The close relationship between the covenant of works and the Mosaic covenant simply highlights this biblical reality.
Conclusion
There is a common saying, that if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Likewise, if the Mosaic covenant is based on the same moral standard, requires the same perfect obedience, contains the same curse of death, holds forth the same promise of eternal life, operates on the same principle of works, and ultimately has the same respect unto a federal head as to its undertaking, then it probably is the covenant of works republished.
Many Reformed theologians are confessionally bound to avoid pulling at this theological thread too tightly. They can see these similarities in the scriptures, but they are pressured to affirm the Mosaic covenant as substantially gracious. Dispensational Federalists don’t face this same restriction. We can pull this thread without restraint, and as we do, the whole confusing theological knot that is bound up in understanding the Mosaic covenant is undone as simply as someone untying a shoelace.
Dispensationalists have typically affirmed the conditionality of the Mosaic covenant, and while they have historically lacked accurate articulation, we believe that their theological inclinations were correct. The doctrine of republication is thoroughly biblical, it comes from within the Reformed tradition itself, and it provides one of the strongest arguments for understanding the conditional nature of the Mosaic covenant. The Mosaic covenant, just like the arrangement made with Adam, was a covenant of works. It, “was necessary to make manifest a works principle that Christ the Messiah would have to fulfil” [10]
Given this, Dispensational Federalists are arguing that the Reformed doctrine of republication provides the necessary framework by which this dispensational tendency can finally find a clear explanation.
We believe that the doctrine of republication is biblical. We also believe that it stands in great need of theological retrieval.
[1] The Law is Not of Faith, p90, Brenton C. Ferry, Works in the Mosaic Covenant, quoting Karlberg, Covenant Theology, 18, “The Mosaic Covenant is to be viewed ‘in some sense’ as a covenant of works.”
[2] OPC Report of the Committee to Study Republication, p112
[3] The Law is Not of Faith, p90, Brenton C. Ferry, Works in the Mosaic Covenant
[4] OPC Report of the Committee to Study Republication, p104
[5] John Owen, Exposition of Hebrews, Volume 6, p78
[6] John Owen, Exposition of Hebrews, Volume 6, p77
[7] John Owen, Exposition of Hebrews, Volume 6, p77
[8] John Owen, Exposition of Hebrews, Volume 6, p77
[9] John Owen, Exposition of Hebrews, Volume 6, p78
[10] Estelle, Fesko, Van Drunen, The Law is Not of Faith, p19
Dispensational Federalism 