Contained below are a number of quotations in which Meredith Kline describes his unique emphasis on the meritorious works-principle operative in the Mosaic Covenant, as well as during other periods of OT history.  In my opinion, Kline clearly affirmed that certain OT figures merited blessings on the basis of their obedience, both for themselves and for others.  And this meritrious works principle operated/functioned in a way that was "opposite" to faith-grace.

 

Aside from the above statement, I will provide no commentary or analysis regarding Kline's views.  Just the "raw data" to let people figure it out for themselves (though I have highlighted certain things to throw emphasis on what I regard as the important lines). 

 

Later, I will post my analysis and commentary on a separate page. 

 

I will post more seriatim.

 

---------------------------------------------------- 

 

“Also contradicting the contention that no divine covenants have ever been governed by the works principle is the irrefutable biblical evidence that the Mosaic economy, while an administration of grace on its fundamental level of concern with the eternal salvation of the individual, was at the same time on its temporary, typological kingdom level informed by the principle of works. Thus, for example, the apostle Paul in Romans 10:4ff. and Galatians 3:10ff. (cf. Rom 9:32) contrasts the old order of the law with the gospel order of grace and faith, identifying the old covenant as one of bondage, condemnation, and death (cf. 2 Cor 3:6-9; Gal 4:24-26). The old covenant was law, the opposite of grace-faith, and in the postlapsarian world that meant it would turn out to be an administration of condemnation as a consequence of sinful Israel's failure to maintain the necessary meritorious obedience. Had the old typological kingdom been secured by sovereign grace in Christ, Israel would not have lost her national election. A satisfactory explanation of Israel's fall demands WORKS, NOT GRACE, as the controlling administrative principle. (Kingdom Prologue, electronic edition)

 

“And according to the covenantal constitution for that old order, corporate Israel must earn the continuing enjoyment of the typological kingdom inheritance by their obedience. This works principle is a conspicuous feature of the sanctions section of the Mosaic treaties.⁴² Expressing things in old covenant terms, Zechariah therefore says that God's kingdom of glory is the reward for the probationary obedience of the elect corporately.

 

Footnote 42: "Cf., e. g., Lev. 18:5; Deut. 28:1, 9, 13, 15; 30:15-20. As Paul's appeal to Lev. 18:5 shows (Rom. 10:5; Gal. 3:12), a legal principle of meritorious works was operating in the Torah covenant opposite to the gospel principle of grace."  (The Exaltation of Christ)

 

 

"Before exploring the exegesis of Rom 5:13-14 it will be useful to clarify the aforementioned controversy among covenant theologians.  Classic covenantalism recognizes that the old Mosaic order (at its foundation level -- that is, as a program of individual salvation in Christ) was in continuity with previous and subsequent administrations of the overarching covenant of grace.  But it also sees and takes at face value the massive Biblical evidence for a peculiar discontinuity present in the old covenant in the form of a principle of meritorious works, operating not as a way of eternal salvation but as the principle governing Israel's retention of its provisional, typological inheritance. [4]  

 

Illustrative of the complexity is Rom 10:5-8, where Paul contrasts law and gospel by juxtaposed quotations, both from the Torah:  Lev 18:5 as expressive of works, Deut 30:12-14 as proclaiming the way of faith in Christ.  Classic covenantalism seeks to do full justice to this complexity by distinguishing two levels of the old covenant, as suggested above.  Among other interpreters, some see the plain meaning of the contrasting strands in Paul's teaching, judge the apostle inconsistent and let it go at that.  Most, with less respect for the plain meaning of the text but more for Paul's (or God's) consistency, try to explain away the apostle's identification of the law as a works arrangement" (Gospel Until Law: Rom 5:13-14 and the Old Covenant).

 

“As in all other administrations in the Covenant of Grace series, the blessings of the covenant with Noah were a gift of grace to ill-deserving sinners, fallen in the first Adam. Yet there was a principle of works in this covenant in connection with the messianic aspect of the typology of the ark-salvation event. The covenant was a covenant of grant, bestowing kingdom benefits as a reward for faithful service rendered to the Lord of the covenant. Noah was a type of Christ, the faithful Servant of the Lord, and as such he was the grantee of the ark covenant…The Lord said to Noah: `Come, you and all your house, into the ark, because I have found you righteous in this generation' (Gen 7:1). Noah's exemplary conduct as a covenant servant receives God's approbation and this righteousness of Noah is declared to be the GROUND for granting to him salvation from judgment and inheritance of the kingdom in the ark. Divine approbation of Noah is also found in Gen 6:8, which states that in contrast to corrupt mankind, whom God intended to destroy, `Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.' The regular meaning of this expression is to be applauded for good service DESERVING of favorable recompense. This same assessment of Noah as `righteous' and `perfect' is repeated in Gen 6:9. Particularly in view in God's commendation of Noah and the covenantal grant based thereon would be his steadfast stand as a prophetic spokesman for God (Gen 6:9; 2 Pet 2:5) amid spreading apostasy and in the face of the satanic opposition of the world rulers of this age.

Special covenantal grants bestowed in return for notable services are attested in the case of others beside Noah. We will take up the case of Abraham at the appropriate point. There were also David (Ps 89:3; 1 Sam 13:14; cf. 1 Sam 16:7; 2 Samuel 5-7) and Phinehas (Num 25:10-13; Ps 106:30). The eternal salvation of these individuals was, of course, a matter of divine mercy and grace through Christ. But it pleased the Lord to invest their exemplary righteousness and outstanding acts of covenantal devotion with special significance so that with reference to a typological manifestation of God's kingdom they prefigured Christ as one who received the kingdom of glory for the faithful performance of the messianic mission stipulated in his eternal covenant with the Father. And in the case of some of these grantees, including Noah, their righteous acts were the grounds for bestowing kingdom benefits on others closely related to them (cf. Noah's household—Gen. 7:1), just as in the case of Christ the many are made righteous by the obedience of the One (Rom 5:19) and become joint-heirs with him of his kingdom inheritance" (God, Heaven, and Har-Magedom, 78-79).

“Genesis 22 records another episode in which an outstanding act of obedience on Abraham's part is said to be the BASIS for the Lord's bestowing on him the blessings of the covenant: `By myself have I sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son, that I will surely bless you . . . because you have obeyed my voice' (vv. 16-18). From the perspective of Abraham's personal experience of justification by faith, this act of obedience validated his faith (Jas 2:21ff.; cf. Gen 15:6). But from the redemptive-historical/eschatological perspective, Abraham's obedience had typological import. The Lord constituted it a prophetic sign of the obedience of Christ, which merits the heavenly kingdom for his people. That Abraham's obedience functioned NOT ONLY as the authentication of his faith for his personal justification BUT AS A MERITORIOUS PERFORMANCE THAT EARNED A REWARD FOR OTHERS (and thus as a type of Christ's obedience) is confirmed in the Lord's later revelation of the covenant promises to Isaac (Gen 26:2ff.). The Lord declared that he would bestow these blessings on Isaac and his descendants `because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws' (v. 5; cf. v. 24). Abraham's obedience was not, of course, the ground for anyone's inheritance of heaven, but it was the GROUND for Israel's inheritance of Canaan, the prototypal heaven, under the terms of the Mosaic covenant of works. Eternal salvation would come because of Christ's obedience, but because of Abraham's obedience Christ would come as to the flesh from Israel (Rom 9:5) and thus salvation would come from the Abrahamites, the Jews (John 4:22)" (God, Heaven, and Har-Magedon, 102-3).

“Inevitably VG mishandles the works-grace issue as it faces him again when he comes to the old covenant and its relation to the new covenant—the law-gospel question. His treatment of this matter is not at all adequate, especially considering the intense interest in it in the world of biblical scholarship and the bitter controversy over it in our theological circles. Perhaps his slighting of the issue betrays VG's uncertainty as to how his rejection of the law-gospel contrast is to be squared with the massive exegetical evidence indicating that, at the level of the typological theocratic kingdom, a works principle was operative in the Mosaic economy.”  (http://www.kerux.com/documents/keruxv14n2r2.htm)

"Not so successful is Holwerda’s handling of the secondary differences present within the fundamental unity of the old and new covenants. A core complex of such elements of discontinuity arose under the old covenant. As ratified by Israel’s oath, this covenant sealed their corporate election as a kingdom people to occupy the typological holy land, continuance in this temporary status being governed by law (i.e. works in contrast to grace). This covenantal core of national election, typological theocratic domain, and law formed an indivisible complex of mutually limiting and conditioning components.  It was a second layer superimposed on the constant foundational stratum of individual election in Christ to eternal glory. It was constituted by and correlative with the old covenant specifically, and, therefore, the termination of the old covenant meant the discontinuance of this complex and the disappearance of its several components.

The main defect of Holwerda’s book is that in a variety of ways he blurs the discontinuity with the new covenant that is entailed in this peculiar core complex of the old covenant."  (http://www.covopc.org/Kline/Reviews/Holwerda.html)