Basic HTML Version
214
Why is it that the doctrine of the covenant of works finds so little acceptance outside of
Reformed circles? What accounts for the widespread neglect of this doctrine in our day? Why is
it important to maintain this doctrine?
LITERATURE:
Bavinck, Geref. Dogm. III, pp. 605-624; III, pp. 1-60; Kuyper, Dict. Dogm., De
Foedere, pp. 23-117; De Peccato, pp. 17-26; Vos. Geref. Dogm. II, pp. 32-54; Hodge, Syst.
Theol., pp. 117-129; Dabney, Syst. and Polem Theol., pp. 332-339; Alexander, Syst. of Bibl.
Theol. I, pp. 183-196; 216-232; Schmid, Doct. Theol. of the Ev. Luth. Ch., pp. 239-242; Valentine,
Chr. Theol. I, pp. 416-420; Litton, Introd. to Dogm. Theol., pp. 133-136; Pope, Chr. Theol., II, pp.
3-28; II, p. 108; Raymond, Svst. Theol. II, pp. 50-63; 99;111; Macintosh, Theol. as an Empirical
Science, pp. 216-229; McPherson, Chr. Dogm., pp. 220-242; Orr, God’s Image in Man; pp. 197-
240; Candlish, The Bibl. Doct. of Sin, pp. 82-89; Talma, De Anthropologie van Calvijn, pp. 69-91;
Kuyper, Uit het Woord, De Leer der Verbonden, pp. 3-221; Tennant, The Origin and Propagation
of Sin; ibid, The Concept of Sin.