Covenant Theology and the Atonement By Darren Middleton
One of the fundamental elements of the Westminster Confession that is regarded by many today as completely outmoded is its covenantal understanding of the Bible. Few theologians treat it with the seriousness that it deserves, and many, even evangelicals, believe that it is fundamentally incompatible with the thought of John Calvin, the father of Reformed theology.
The reasons why it has been discarded, despite having such strong advocates as BB Warfield, WGT Shedd and Louis Berkof in the 20th century, are many and varied. Probably the most potent force behind its gradual disappearance has been the change in understanding of the origin of man that has taken place since Darwin. The growing authority of science has meant that a doctrine rooted in the historicity of Adam has fallen into general disfavour. But there are also voices within the Reformed community who impugn covenant theology on the grounds that it seems to establish man’s relationship with God on the basis of law, not grace. The question is: does covenant theology deserve such bad press?
First, let’s see why this is an important issue. Covenant theology is the biblical framework in which we understand the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It answers questions like: Why did Jesus have to come to earth? Why did he have to keep the law? Why did he die if he was without sin? Importantly, it explains for whom he lived and died.
Covenant of Redemption
The Bible teaches that life can only be explained in terms of a covenant which the Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit - made between themselves (John 17:2,4,5). This covenant of redemption included God’s choosing of a people to be saved (Eph 1:4 – the elect), the agent of salvation (Eph 3:11 - Christ) and through whom it would be applied (2 Thess 2:13 – the Holy Spirit). The essence of this covenant was Jesus’ willingness to become our representative and our righteousness through his earthly life of obedience to God’s law and his atoning death as a propitiation to appease God’s wrath against sin ((Rom 5:12ff; 3:25). As a result, the Father conferred a kingdom upon Jesus where he will rule over his elect people (Luke 22:29; Gal 3:9;16). Consequently, the eternal covenant finds its expression in redemptive history through two covenants called the covenant of works and the covenant of grace.
Covenant of Works
A careful reading of Gen 2-3; Hos 6:7; Rom 5:12-19 and 1 Cor 15:42-49 confirms the Confession’s teaching that “life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience” (WCF 7:2). Romans 5:12 teaches that Adam was our representative and as such, entered into a covenant [of works] with God, whereby he was offered eternal life predicated upon his perfect personal obedience. At the same time, there was the possibility of death and judgment if he disobeyed. Scripture teaches us that Adam, our representative, broke the covenant and so sin, death and judgment came upon us all (See Hos 6:7, Rom 5:12,18).
Since we are condemned in Adam as covenant breakers and unable to be justified by the law (Gal 3:11), the Bible introduces us to a new hope in Gen 3:15. We are promised someone who would crush Satan’s head and as our representative would obey God’s commands, keep his covenant and then die for our sin. Reformed theology calls this the covenant of grace.
Covenant of Grace
The covenant of grace, then, spans the whole of redemptive history from Gen 3:15 till the coming of the Lord. Whereas in the covenant of works salvation was to be merited by works, in the Covenant of Grace it is received by faith alone in the works of Christ. Though there are many covenants (Noah, Abraham, Moses, David etc), covenant theology teaches that each of these covenants are in fact administrations of the one covenant of grace that reach their fulfillment in Christ as the second Adam. It is through faith in Christ as the second Adam, especially in his life, death and resurrection, that God’s people (the elect) receive eternal life.
Atonement
Covenant theology teaches that Jesus, as the second Adam, came to save lost sinners (Tim 1:15). His work is not simply to open up the possibility of salvation, but to save completely those who come to God through him (Heb 7:24ff). That is why the writer of Hebrews can say that by his blood he has obtained eternal redemption for those he represents (Heb 9:12). His intercession for his people never fails (John 17:2,4,6,9; Rom 8:32-34).
One of the interesting characteristics of those who deny covenant theology is that they can never guarantee that Christ’s death saves anyone without resorting to the old heresy of universalism. Yet, those within the Reformed tradition and who subscribe to covenant theology believe that Christ died for the elect (Isa 53:11;John 10:11,15). John Owen (Death of Death etc) puts it like this: “I may add this dilemma to our universalists: God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the pains of hell for, either all the sins of all men, or all the sins of some men, or some sins of all men. If the last, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for, and so shall no man be saved. (Ps 130:3)
….If the second, that is it which we affirm, that Christ in their stead and room suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the world. If the first, why, then are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, "Because of their unbelief; they will not believe." But this unbelief, is it a sin, or not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died..? If he did not, then he did not die for all their sins. Let them choose which part they will.”
Published in APL.