CD 2.11

2.11. Second Head of Doctrine, Rejection of Errors 2

That it was not the purpose of the death of Christ that He should confirm the new covenant of grace through His blood, but only that He should acquire for the Father the mere right to establish with man such a covenant as He might please, whether of grace or of works. For this is repugnant to Scripture which teaches that Christ has become the Surety and Mediator of a better, that is, the new covenant, and that a testament is of force where death has occurred. "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament" (Heb. 7:22); "And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance"; "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Heb. 9:15, 17).

Proof texts

• Heb. 7:22 — [22] This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.
• Heb. 9:15, 17 — [15] Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. [17] For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

For discussion

1. The Assembly cited Heb. 7:22 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
2. 2 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
3. WSC Q21 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
4. WLC Q36 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?

Read alongside

WSC Q21 · WLC Q36 · WCF 8.1 · HC Q37 · BC 5.5 · BC 5.6 · 1689 8.1