Covenant Theology - What is it?

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY?

Covenant Theology teaches that God’s relationship with humanity operates through overarching theological covenants: the covenant of works, the covenant of grace, and sometimes, the covenant of redemption. These categories are inferred as a way to unify the Bible’s storyline. Covenant of works refers to Adam’s relationship with God where life required perfect obedience (Genesis 2:16-17; Hosea 6:7). After Adam’s fall, the other subsequent Old Testament covenants are viewed as part of His covenant of grace, offering salvation by faith through a promised Redeemer (Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:8). Proponents believe this covenant continues unchanged throughout redemptive history, uniting Old and New Testament believers into one covenant people.

While Covenant Theology rightly emphasizes God’s sovereign plan and the unity of salvation by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), it tends to flatten important biblical distinctions—such as those between Israel and the Church or the old and new covenants (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:6-13; Romans 11:25-29). Interpreting many Old Testament promises spiritually or symbolically can obscure or downplay the literal fulfilment of physical promises (Genesis 12:7; Ezekiel 36:24-28). Rather, the Bible presents covenants as real historical arrangements with specific terms and participants (Exodus 24:3-8) that culminate in Christ but are not expressions of a single theological covenant. Scripture affirms continuity in God’s redemptive plan, but it also maintains clear distinctions between the covenants God makes (Galatians 4:24-26; Romans 9:4-5).

FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT

• In the garden of Eden, God gave Adam a clear command with consequences. If he obeyed, then he would live but if he disobeyed, then he would die (Genesis 2:16-17). Some theologians see covenantal-like elements in this command. This view isn’t inherently wrong, but the Bible never presents it as a formal covenant like it does with Noah, Abraham, or Israel. Therefore, it’s better to see this command as setting the stage for humanity’s fall and the need for redemption rather than being a covenant.
• The first clearly defined covenant is the Noahic Covenant. In it, God promised Noah that He would never again destroy the earth with a flood (Genesis 9:8-17). This covenant is between God and all of mankind and is one-sided because we do not need to fulfill any obligation in order for God to keep His promise.
• The next covenant is God’s covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12 and 15, and it centers on land, offspring, and blessing. These promises are confirmed with a solemn covenant ceremony in Genesis 15, where God bound Himself unilaterally to fulfill what He promised. While the Abrahamic Covenant includes spiritual blessings, the literal reading does not present it as a metaphor for salvation, but as a promise of physical descendants and land.
• The Mosaic covenant, established at Sinai (Exodus 19-24), differs from the Abrahamic covenant in that it is a conditional covenant. It calls Israel to obey the law in order to remain in the land and experience blessing (Deuteronomy 28). This covenant is national in scope and was temporary in function, ultimately pointing to Israel’s need for a savior.
• Because Israel was unable to keep the Mosaic covenant, God promised a new covenant that will not be like the one made with Israel at Sinai. He said, “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jeremiah 31:33b). The New Testament is this covenant.

FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT

• In the New Testament, Christ is the mediator of the new and better covenant (Hebrews 8:6). This covenant is not a continuation of previous ones. Quoting passages such as Ezekiel 19:5 and Jeremiah 31:33 which prophesied the new covenant, the author of Hebrews said, “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (Hebrews 8:13). He was not saying that the old covenant was morphing into the new, but that it was made obsolete, replaced by the new. The new covenant is based in Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20), and its benefits are changed hearts, full forgiveness, and direct access to God.
• Paul explained the relationship between the Abrahamic promise and the Mosaic law. He said that the Mosaic law was “added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made” (Galatians 3:19). That is, he was saying that it was because of their sin that God gave the law to be “our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24). So, it was never to be a permanent covenant, but a temporary one until Jesus came.
• The New Testament also distinguishes between Israel and the Church. Using the illustration of a tree where branches were broken off and replaced with other branches, Paul said that Israel was temporarily broken off to make room for the Gentiles but that “a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in” (Romans 11:25b). By a partial hardening, he meant that there are Jews who are currently being saved (Romans 11:1), but that all Israel will believe after the Gentiles, Therefore, the New Testament maintains that Israel, as an ethnic people, still has a future role in God’s redemptive plan.
• In Ephesians 2:11-22, Paul shows that Gentiles, once strangers to the covenants of promise, have now been brought near through Christ. This unity does not erase historical distinctions but fulfills God’s plan to unite Jew and Gentile in one body—something not revealed in previous ages (Ephesians 3:4-6).

IMPLICATIONS FOR TODAY

Covenant Theology rightly affirms that God has always saved His people by grace through faith. In that sense, it is perfectly in line with Biblical teaching. But because it is a system that relies on theological assumptions not directly stated in Scripture, it requires careful discernment, especially where its conclusions affect the original meaning of Old Testament passages.

Understanding the covenants as both historical and progressive helps reveal the beauty of God’s complex plan being unfolded over time. God’s incomprehensible wisdom is revealed. None of the covenants were “Plan B,” but were all a part of His means for showing us clearly that we need a Redeemer who could live perfectly and die for us as a substitute. With the New Testament, that Man was finally revealed: His Son, Jesus.

If you’re in Christ, you are a beneficiary of that new covenant. You’ve been forgiven and made part of God’s household. However, if you are not currently a believer, then you will be personally held responsible for keeping the law perfectly. If you have failed at any point (and you already have!), then you face the just punishment of eternal separation from God. What the Old Testaments were showing was that God demands His people to be holy to be in relationship with Him. In the New Covenant, God took our salvation upon Himself by sending His Son, Jesus, to live perfectly and then die as a substitute. Being “in Christ” means repenting of your sins and trust in Him as Lord and Savior. When you do, your sins will be covered by Jesus’ blood, and you will be made a new creature, entering into an eternal relationship with God.

UNDERSTAND

• According to Covenant Theology, God’s relationship with humankind functions through the covenants of works, grace, and sometimes, redemption.
• Covenant theology stresses God’s sovereign grace but deemphasizes the literal fulfillment of God’s Old Testament promises.
• Under Covenant Theology, biblical distinctions between Israel and the Church are deemphasized.

REFLECT

• What importance does your theological framework have on the way you view and understand the Bible?
• How do God’s fulfilled promises in the Old Testament help you to better understand His character?
• How does being under God’s grace through Christ impact how you live your life?

ENGAGE

• How might believers who view the Bible through different theological frameworks learn from each other?
• What might be the risks of interpreting Old Testament promises primarily in a spiritual or symbolic way rather than literally?
• How can highlighting God’s fulfilled promises in Old Testament covenants help to reveal His character to those who don’t know Him?