Covenant Theology: Introduction & Overview (Part One)

Welcome to the education series on an introduction to covenant theology. Your host for this series is going to be

Jimmy Buehler, pastor of Christ Community Church in Willmar, Minnesota, and Justin Perdue, pastor of Covenant Baptist Church in Asheville, North Carolina.

I'm John Moffitt, pastor of Grace Reform Church here in Spring Hill, Tennessee. Gentlemen, it's actually great to be able to do this recording together in the same room.

Normally, we have to zoom in, so it'll be good to do this education series together. I think it'll be beneficial for us and for the listener.

So, Jimmy, tell us a little bit about this series and what it is that we're trying to accomplish. Jimmy Buehler Yeah, so obviously this is kind of an introductory episode into covenant theology.

As we think about the structure and framework of the Bible, Christians universally believe that God is a covenant -keeping

God. As we look throughout the Old Testament, we see the Abrahamic covenant, the Noahic covenant, so on and so forth.

But what we want to present today is an idea of what is known as covenant theology.

Our churches, the three churches that we represent here, all subscribe to the 1689

London Baptist Confession. Specifically, in chapter seven of that confession, you begin to see language around God's covenant, specifically things like the covenant of grace or the covenant of works, perhaps even the covenant of redemption.

These categories might seem foreign to you. So if you're new to this, this is what we are going to spend this series looking at from our perspective and understanding of a

Reformed covenant theology. Justin Perdue Jimmy, you talked about the fact that Christians universally will acknowledge that God is a covenant -keeping

God. We want to be really clear that when we talk about covenant theology, we don't just mean that there are covenants in the

Bible. We don't just mean that God works through covenants. When we talk about covenant theology, what we are describing is a framework through which we understand and interpret

Scripture. We talk a lot at Theocast about the redemptive historical framework of the Bible, and I think it's going to become increasingly clear as we have these conversations that that redemptive historical framework and a covenantal framework go together.

We were talking a little bit before we hit record for this that in one sense, covenant theology, along with that redemptive historical piece, is like a map to help people orient themselves in Scripture.

We can open up to almost any text and be oriented to know what's north, south, east, west, and where we are in this great story of redemption and this great plan of redemption that God is accomplishing.

Justin Perdue I think when a lot of people approach the Bible, it can be very dense and overwhelming.

We always have to remember that we're dealing with a very old text, an ancient text.

Jon Moffitt That covers thousands of years. Jimmy Buehler Absolutely, thousands of years of history, and specifically redemptive history.

But it is of utmost importance because the Bible gives us an understanding of how

God relates to man and how God has sent Christ into the world to redeem sinners. We believe that covenant theology gives us a proper framework to not just understand church and the

Christian life, but it gives us a proper framework to understand the Bible in total. Justin Perdue It gives us a proper framework to understand redemption.

We're going to get to this, but the stuff we talk about on Theocast all the time about rest and assurance and peace and the sufficiency of Jesus is absolutely linked to covenant theology.

Everyone that goes through the Bible has a framework, has a structure. It may not be one that has been handed down to you from the church historically.

That means it's one that you have formulated yourself. Here's an example of this.

If you've been born and raised in a Christian evangelical church, then most likely you have some understanding of the

Trinity. Whenever you read a passage that says God, Yahweh, Jesus, Holy Spirit, you automatically place that text into a

Trinitarian framework. You never read it outside of that. You always interpret it meaning this isn't two separate gods, or these aren't three separate gods.

This is one God that is a Trinitarian God. That's a structure that you place upon the text, but it's not that you place upon it.

It's derivative of all of Scripture and then interpreted in that way. When people say you place it upon the text, what we mean by that is we're taking the entire structure of Trinitarian theology and then using that to interpret

Scripture. Justin Perdue We'll talk some about this maybe, but there's something known as the word concept fallacy, where people will object sometimes to something like covenant theology.

They'll say, you guys are going to use some terms like the covenant of works, for example. That language is not specifically in Scripture to which we would respond somewhat like what you just did.

The word Trinity is not in Scripture either. Even some things like church membership that many churches practice, those words are not in Scripture, but the principles are there.

What we're trying to do is reason from the text. When we talk about covenant theology, it's not something that we are laying down on the text and imposing upon it.

It's something that comes up out of it, but it helps us to understand it and it helps us to summarize well what's contained in all of Scripture, how

God works, and how God redeems. Justin Perdue I think what would be helpful now perhaps is if we move into this whole question of where did this come from?

Where did this understanding of covenant theology come from? This is piggybacking on what we were just discussing of the whole idea of are we placing this on the text?

Is this a new idea? JP, I think you have some historical insight into this whole idea of covenant theology, so why don't you give us a little bit of that before we get into what exactly we mean.

JP I don't know that I've got a lot of unique insight, but I can do a flyover really quickly of where some of this even comes from historically.

Many listening will be familiar with the Protestant Reformation. Most of us would all look back and agree that it began most substantially in the year 1517.

In the decades and even in the centuries that follow the Reformation, as doctrine is being hammered out and discussed and debated, there are various groups that flow out of the

Reformation. One of those groups are referred to as just the Reformed. It's understood as Reformed Christianity.

Then within that group of people or underneath that banner of Reformed Christians, you have several different kinds.

You have Presbyterians who would have held to the Westminster Confession that was written in the 1640s.

You had Independents or Congregationalists who would have held to what was called the Savoy Declaration of 1658.

Then you also have particular Baptists who held to the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

The thing about all of those people is that all of them understood themselves to be covenantal.

All of them understood themselves to be Reformed and to be within that covenantal Reformed heritage.

They understood each other to be. There's a lot of unity when it comes to covenant theology.

We've all said this. Properly understood, Reformed theology is covenant theology.

We have so much in common with other brothers and sisters who might not hold to the exact same confession we do, but we are confessing and believing and teaching the same truths high level about covenant theology.

Of course, there are going to be some distinctions, and that's fine. But we all come from the same place.

We all hail from the Reformation. Jon Moffitt I think now what we can do is maybe give a really quick overview of what the rest of the series is going to be so that you maybe have a glossary.

When we reference things, you understand what it is that we mean. Let's start with where we're going to begin in our next episode, which is the covenant of redemption.

Give us some words to look for, Jimmy, and what does it mean? Jimmy Buehler By way of keeping in tune that this is not something that we are placing on the text, but something that we are deriving from the text.

If you're listening, opening your Bible to Ephesians chapter one would be really helpful as we think about the covenant of redemption.

Specifically, Ephesians one, three through fourteen. When we think about the covenant of redemption, what we mean by that is the covenant of redemption.

Covenant being a formal agreement. The covenant of redemption is the formal agreement within the

Godhead, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This formal agreement was made before the foundation of the world to redeem

God's elect. We see this very clearly in Ephesians chapter one.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.

What we see arising out of the text is that we are starting to see that there is some sort of agreement.

There is some sort of idea within the Godhead, because later we see in verses thirteen and fourteen, the

Holy Spirit seals that adoption in Christ for us. There is some sort of agreement made before the foundation of the world that God would redeem sinners.

What I like to say to our church, which I think is helpful and simple, is that God the

Father has planned redemption, God the Son has accomplished redemption, and God the

Holy Spirit is who applies redemption. That really is a simple, succinct understanding of the covenant of redemption.

Justin Perdue A couple other verses and texts that are helpful when it comes to the covenant of redemption sometimes referred to as the pactum salutis.

You have 2 Timothy 1 .9, where Paul is talking about how God has saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began.

There you have that. Titus chapter one and verse two, you're talking about the hope of eternal life.

Paul is writing about which God who never lies promised before the ages began. Again, we have this language of eternity past and God deciding something.

You'll hear Jesus in John 17 speak of this a lot in his prayer to the Father, where he'll talk about the relationship that existed between him and the

Father before the world began, and the plans that they had, and glory and love, and even this end goal that Christ's people would be with him to see the glory that the

Father gave him before the ages began. It's that language that we're picking up on, this covenant amongst the

Godhead, this agreement amongst the Godhead in eternity past to save a people. This is a great example of knowing how to read your

Bible from back to forward. We often think we start with Genesis and we read from Genesis forward, which technically, if you're going to begin at the beginning of the story, that's fine.

But the end of the story has come to us. The book is completed and it's been handed to us.

What the Reformation has done to help explain the Old Testament is you have to use what we would say the lenses of the

New Testament. This is a great example that if you started in Genesis and you read forward, you would see the whole story unfold, and then you would get all the way through Revelation.

At one point you're going to hit Ephesians and you're going to hear this language of redemption happening before Genesis started.

Then you go back and read it again with the lens of redemption knowing that before the world ever began, the

Trinity made a covenant. This is covenantal language. This is promised language.

Now you're going to read the whole story differently because it's being unfolded in the light of what happened at the end.

Everybody reads and interprets Scripture through lenses. It is impossible to go to the

Bible with this idea, which is nonsensical, that I'm going to read it for what it is and I'm not going to read anything into it.

I think we need to be very clear that the greatest interpreter of Scripture is Scripture itself.

What we are saying is that these ideas concerning covenants arise out of Scripture.

The New Testament tells us how to read the Old Testament. Justin Perdue We may get to this more in a minute when we talk about something else, but I'll go ahead and say it now because it's been brought up.

We understand the Old Testament in light of the New Testament. As has been said by many before us, but maybe very well by a man named

Nehemiah Cox, who lived in the 17th century, he said the best interpreter of the Old Testament is the

Holy Spirit speaking to us in the New. That's all we're saying. We interpret

Scripture with Scripture, and we allow the apostles to teach us how to interpret the

Old Testament. That's all covenant theology is. Jimmy, you're exactly right. To think that we come to Scripture without any presuppositions, without any kind of framework or system, is completely naive and ridiculous.

We all have a system. We all have a framework. The question is, is your system any good or not? Is your framework any good or not?

Where does it come from? That's what we're talking about. It's a framework that comes out of Scripture, that is faithful to the text, that helps us understand the whole.

We'll get more into this as the series goes on. Even Jesus, when He's on the Emmaus Road, He says that the law and the prophets were about Him.

Jesus is now interpreting. We're going to fit that all together. Once you understand that the framework of Scripture is the unfolding covenant that the

Father made with the Son that's going to be applied by the Spirit, the question is, how does that happen?

In one sense, all of Scripture is the unfolding of the accomplishment of the covenant of redemption.

It does feel strange to say, go to the New Testament first than to read the Old Testament. In illustration of this, when the

Old Testament writers were unfolding the history of what's going on with Israel, it was almost like they were putting together a puzzle, but it was upside down.

They saw the puzzle pieces and they were connecting together, but they didn't really see the whole picture.

They hadn't seen the box. In the New Testament, someone basically handed you the box cover.

The puzzle is done. They flipped it over and took a photo of it and said, this is the finished piece. Now you get to go back and see how it all comes together.

That is what we're talking about. The covenant of redemption is the box cover. This is what's going on throughout the whole

Testament. Unless we think that this is foreign and something that we are placing on Scripture.

The one sermon we don't have the Bible that I think all of us would like to hear is when Jesus says, I'm on the road to Emmaus.

He's telling these guys how all of the Scriptures, the Law of the Prophets, are about him. Frankly, this is where maybe an understanding of what terminology that might sound technical of types and shadows.

When you read through the Old Testament, it is easy to be confused with a lot of the obscure language, the obscure stories, and to get lost in the weeds there.

However, when we read Scripture as a whole, something that all of us emphasize in all of our churches is that we constantly have to look at Scripture in a unified whole.

For example, perhaps an easy illustration is when we see during the Exodus, the blood of Passover lamb being wiped on the doorpost.

If you were reading the Bible for the first time and you got there and you had no concept of who

Christ is and what he came to accomplish, you might read that and say, that is very, very odd. Why would we do that?

But what do we see later in the New Testament? How does John the Baptist introduce Christ? He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

What we see is that these types and shadows in the Old Testament come into further view and understanding in the

New Testament. Justin Perdue That's exactly right. We'll use the language sometimes of types and anti -types.

Types reveal something greater and other than themselves, meaning they reveal ultimately the anti -type.

Anti -types are things that are greater and more ultimate and are distinct from the types themselves. Types are things in and of themselves.

Your example is great. The Passover is a thing in and of itself. It happened in time and space and history, and it meant something for Israel.

It pointed to something even greater to come, where the blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, would be shed and would be used then as God the

Father would look at that blood. It would cover the sins and the iniquity of Christ's people, of God's people, and we would then be passed over and saved.

That's just one example of so many that we could use where it's a thing in and of itself, but it points to something greater that will come later in redemptive history that is ultimate.

Justin Perdue The illustration I would use is when you sit down at a restaurant and they have pictures of their food and you're looking at a type of the food.

What do they do with the menu after you order your food? In time later, they're actually going to bring you the anti -type.

You don't need the type anymore because you have the real substance at that point. Jon Moffitt The type finds its end and its fulfillment in the anti -type.

Once the anti -type comes, the fulfillment comes, the type is no longer needed other than to continue to help us understand the ultimate thing.

Justin Perdue We'll explain this more in the upcoming episodes, but this is even why in Hebrews it says that the sacrifice is the book of Hebrews.

This is what the author of Hebrews or the preacher of the book of Hebrews is saying to the church.

All of those things that you have recognized in the

Scriptures find their greater fulfillment in Christ. Tim Keller famously coined the idea that Jesus is the truer and better insert whatever you may about the

Old Testament. Jon Moffitt Part of covenant theology is understanding types and shadows and type and anti -type.

There is a concept called bi -covenantalism, meaning two different covenants.

We understand that the covenant of redemption is what all of Scripture is about.

How is that fulfilled? How is it accomplished? It is accomplished through two covenants.

You have the covenant of works and then you have the covenant of grace.

I'll explain what the covenant of works is and we'll have Justin explain what the covenant of grace is. All of Scripture falls under these two categories.

Adam and Eve in the Garden, Genesis 3 .15, or Genesis chapter 3 are given one rule.

Wouldn't it be great to live in a world where you had one rule? One prohibition. They're given things to do positively, but then one prohibition.

One prohibition, thank you. That prohibition is don't eat of this particular tree. He says if you eat of this tree, you will die.

We all know the story of the eight of the tree. In a covenant of works, the reason why they call it work is that if Adam would have fulfilled this one prohibition and refrained, what we will learn is what he would have earned for he and all his descendants.

It is eternity with God in that state or in that garden in the world.

In a consummated, redeemed, perfect state. The reason why we use that word earn is because later on,

Paul even describes where Adam failed, Christ comes and succeeds. We'll look at all of those texts.

Throughout the rest of Scripture, this reference to and pointing back to Adam's failure and because of the nature of his failure being passed down to his descendants.

One of the reasons we call it a covenant of works as well is because it is conditioned upon what man does.

That's very easy for all of us to understand. Had Adam positively done the things he was told to do and had he abstained from the one thing he was told not to do, then yes, all would be well forever.

We would be with God in a perfect state, living in perfect relationship with him and with each other forever.

Jimmy Buehler And frankly, where we see this very clearly is not only in Genesis, but Paul expounds on this very clearly in the book of Romans, specifically chapter five.

As somebody who's perhaps new to covenant theology, if you're listening to this, you might say, this doesn't seem right or fair or just.

We always have to remind ourselves that as we relate to an infinite being, God is the one who sets the standards of how we relate to him.

As our confession states, it pleases God to relate to us through covenants.

As we think about the covenant of works, if God relates to us through Adam in the covenant of works and you might think that that's unfair, then you're really not going to like the covenant of grace.

It is also not fair. Before I jump into the covenant of grace, the

Bible is clear that not only are there these covenants of works and grace, there are two what we call covenant heads or two federal heads.

Federal being another term for covenant in one sense. Those two covenant heads in Scripture are Adam and Christ.

Justin Perdue Another way of saying that is like a representative. A king is the representative of his people. Justin Perdue Correct. That's why

Scripture constantly uses the language of being in Adam or in Christ.

Romans 5 does this, in 1 Corinthians 15 he does this, that in Adam all die, in Christ all are made alive.

There's that distinction between the two. Adam was given a covenant to fulfill, a covenant that was conditioned upon his performance, and he failed.

Justin Perdue Therefore, because he's the federal head or he's the representative, therefore all now are guilty.

Justin Perdue Exactly. Guilty, corrupt, and ruined. Jimmy Buehler As Paul says, as in one man's disobedience, all men died.

It's so important to remember that when Adam sinned in the garden, we all sinned in the garden because we would have done the same thing.

Nobody can look back at a pre -Genesis 3 world and say, I wish I was there because I would have done it differently.

The fact of the matter is, no, you would not have. Justin Perdue The covenant of grace is different than the covenant of works.

The covenant of works was conditioned upon Adam's obedience and Adam's performance. We could even just say it's conditioned upon man's obedience or man's performance.

The covenant of grace is different in that it is not conditioned upon our performance. It is conditioned upon Christ and his work.

The covenant of grace, in one sense, to define this simply, is that Jesus comes to fulfill the covenant of works that Adam failed in, that Adam broke.

Then the merit, satisfaction, righteousness, and new creation inheritance that is Christ's is given to sinners by faith.

It is not conditioned upon what we do. We receive what Christ has done. The covenant of grace is promised and revealed in Genesis 3.

When the fall occurs, sin enters the world and man falls and is ruined and dies. In verse 15 of Genesis 3,

God promises a Redeemer who will come, the seed of the woman who will come to crush the head of the snake and be the

Redeemer. It's very clear that Adam and Eve understand something of that. Even the fact that Adam names

Eve Eve and understands that life is going to come. That promise of the covenant of grace continues to be revealed more and more throughout the

Old Testament. Then it is finally established and accomplished by Jesus in the new covenant. We'll talk more about the particulars of that, but to understand that distinction between covenant of works and grace is important to start with.

Then we'll unpack it. There are two things that we need to unfold. We've given the structure.

There are two explanations we need to offer. One is promise versus covenant.

We probably need to explain when we use the word covenant. It's like when someone says, I'm a

Christian. That could mean a hundred different things. What kind of Christianity are we talking about?

I think the same thing can happen here. When we say covenant, what do we mean by covenant? Let's give a definition of covenant, which then will help wrap people's minds around covenant of works.

The biggest argumentation, which we will give a full explanation when we get into the covenant of works in that particular session, is that some people will say, there's never the word covenant used in the garden with Adam and Eve.

Let's first define what covenant is, and then that'll help us explain why we would hold that position. We'll fully explain it in that session.

I think I'll leave some technical definition to you guys, but I just want to share a little analogy.

Ten years ago, in the month of June, I went to my wife and I made her a promise.

I promised her that I would remain faithful to her until our marriage day when that promise became fulfilled.

In that, we became one. We became one union, one flesh. As we think about the idea of promise and covenant, think almost like in terms of a relationship today, in terms of engagement and marriage.

Engagement is what? It is a promise of a formal relationship. Nobody stays engaged for their entire relationship.

If they do, give us a call and we'll try to talk you out of that. What is the point of the engagement?

You are engaged to be married. As we think about promise and covenant, promise and covenant is the same idea.

Covenant is this formal idea, this formal relationship. Justin Perdue With a covenant, you have multiple parties and those parties are identifiable.

There are commitments that the parties make and there are sanctions attached to the agreement as well.

Jon Moffitt There are different kinds of covenants in the Bible. As an example, the covenant that God made with Noah is between two parties.

It's between God and the world. There's a sign, which is the bow, but in that covenant, there's only one who is keeping it.

Justin Perdue There's only one actor. Jon Moffitt That's right, which is God. Justin Perdue One person who's active. Jon Moffitt That would be a different kind of covenant.

Then you have covenants that God makes between Israel and himself. What kind of covenant would that be?

Justin Perdue Well, there's two parties in there and there's two actors in it. Jon Moffitt Right, but it's conditional.

Justin Perdue Of course it is. Jon Moffitt There's a conditional. Noahic is no condition. The Mosaic, when he gives them the law, it says, you obey this law and then the covenant will remain between the two of us.

Justin Perdue There are unconditional covenants, there are conditional covenants, and there are also unconditional promises.

I don't know how far down the road we want to get with this, but we understand that the unconditional promise of the covenant of grace is revealed in Genesis 3 .15

and then throughout the Old Testament in various ways. There are conditional covenants made in the

Old Covenant that we'll unpack more, and there is the unconditional covenant, the covenant of grace proper, that we understand to be established and accomplished by Jesus in the

New Covenant. It has nothing to do with us. We don't contribute a thing. It's all about what Jesus has done and we simply receive that.

Justin Perdue I would say for a lot of Christianity, I know for myself, covenant theology was only really explained when we were talking about Noah and somewhat of a little bit of an understanding between Moses.

To my own shame, even going through Bible college, I really didn't even understand the Abrahamic covenant and the significance of it.

I know there are many who are listening and going, the word covenant is so foreign and strange to me.

Justin Perdue We've got several episodes coming for people to get more information on these various things that we're beginning to just open up now.

Maybe we can land the plane here these last few minutes and talk with people about why covenant theology matters for them.

If somebody is listening and they're thinking, help me understand what this means for me and why

I should care about covenant theology. What does this mean for me on a Tuesday morning or a Friday evening or when

I'm having a bad day? How is covenant theology helpful? Jon Moffitt Something I like to remind our church consistently is that God is a covenant -keeping

God and God is a promise -keeping God. As we think about our Christian life, so often where we can be drawn is, what do

I need to do for Jesus today? How do I maintain my right relationship with Jesus today? Perhaps the most airtime that we gave in this episode was to the covenant of redemption.

So when you read Ephesians chapter one, I invite you to go and read that and sit there for a very long time.

I want you to be in Paul's seat. As Paul approached

Ephesians being a letter he wrote from prison, he has some time to sit down and think, what does he want to tell people?

He wants to give people this unbreakable assurance that they are saved and redeemed, not based off of who they are, what they've done, how they've sinned, or how they've been good or bad or anything else.

Rather, they are saved and safe based off of the eternal promise and covenant made between the

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the covenant of redemption. As we look at that, and the more we understand it, and the more we see it throughout the entire narrative of the

Bible, we have increased assurance in our God that when He says something, it is true.

When He says that we are forgiven, we can bank on it based off of what we see in the covenant of redemption. Many of the things that we talk about on Theocast that some people listening to this will be familiar with, some people will not be, and it's fine.

We talk a lot about resting in Christ. We talk about the sufficiency of Jesus, how He's done everything that we need in order to be saved and in order to have peace with God.

We talk a lot about assurance. How can we know, Jimmy, like you were just talking about? How can we know that we're safe and that things aren't just okay for me today, but they're going to be okay for me forever?

How do we know that stuff? Covenant theology is inextricably linked to that. I think that will become increasingly clear over these episodes and sessions that we do, especially in seeing what

Jesus accomplished in the covenant of grace by fulfilling the covenant of works in order to accomplish the redemption.

There is certainty and rock to put under our feet, and it helps us understand how there is no room left for anything else to be contributed.

Jesus has done this, and because Jesus has done this and I'm in Him, I'm safe. That matters more than anything for sinners in a fallen world.

Our goal is not for you to gain head knowledge, but for you to know more about the

Bible. I believe that because we understand the Bible to unfold in this way, it brings the entire

Bible to relevancy and it brings it to life where every verse applies to our life because it's the unfolding, promise -keeping

God who was faithful in the old and will be faithful in the new. We will go ahead and move on to our next session, and thanks for listening.