Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

social and civil relations in which the people stood to each other had to reflect the
covenant relation in which they stood.
There have been several deviating opinions respecting the Sinaitic covenant which
deserve attention.
a. Coccejus saw in the decalogue a summary expression of the covenant of grace,
particularly applicable to Israel. When the people, after the establishment of this
national covenant of grace, became unfaithful and made a golden calf, the legal
covenant of the ceremonial service was instituted as a stricter and harsher dispensation
of the covenant of grace. Thus the revelation of grace is found particularly in the
decalogue, and that of servitude in the ceremonial law. Before the covenant of Sinai the
fathers lived under the promise. There were sacrifices, but these were not obligatory.
b. Others regarded the law as the formula of a new covenant of works established
with Israel. God did not really intend that Israel should merit life by keeping the law,
since this had become utterly impossible. He simply wanted them to try their strength
and to bring them to a consciousness of their own inability. When they left Egypt, they
stood strong in the conviction that they could do all that the Lord commanded; but at
Sinai they soon discovered that they could not. In view of their consciousness of guilt
the Lord now reestablished the Abrahamic covenant of grace, to which also the
ceremonial law belonged. This reverses the position of Coccejus. The element of grace is
found in the ceremonial law. This is somewhat in line with the view of present day
dispensationalists, who regard the Sinaitic covenant as a “conditional Mosaic covenant
of works” (Scofield), containing in the ceremonial law, however, some adumbrations of
the coming redemption in Christ.
c. Still others are of the opinion that God established three covenants at Sinai, a
national covenant, a covenant of nature or of works, and a covenant of grace. The first
was made with all the Israelites, and was the continuation of the particularistic line
which began with Abraham. In it God demands external obedience, and promises
temporal blessings. The second was a repetition of the covenant of works by the giving
of a decalogue. And the last a renewal of the covenant of grace, as it was established
with Abraham, in the giving of the ceremonial law.
These views are all objectionable for more than one reason: (1) They are contrary to
Scripture in their multiplication of the covenants. It is un-Scriptural to assume that more
than one covenant was established at Sinai, though it was a covenant with various
aspects. (2) They are mistaken in that they seek to impose undue limitations on the
decalogue and on the ceremonial law. It is very evident that the ceremonial law has a
330