Chapter 1: Introducing Covenant Theology

The purpose of this book is to provide a thorough understanding of Reformed covenant theology. We will approach the subject from three broad perspectives: systematic theology, biblical theology, and practical theology.

1. The systematic-theological approach considers the three great theological covenants: the covenant of works, the covenant of redemption, and the covenant of grace.
2. The biblical-theological approach examines the covenants expressly revealed in the history of redemption, such as the covenants with Noah, Abraham, Israel through Moses, and David, culminating in the new covenant. These biblical covenants are related to the three theological covenants, but the two categories are not identical.
3. The practical-theological approach asks how covenant theology illuminates the gospel, shapes the Christian life, clarifies the place of obedience in the covenant of grace, and informs our doctrine of the sacraments.

Covenant theology is therefore much broader than a particular position on baptism. It is an attempt to understand how the whole Bible fits together: how Scripture unfolds from Genesis to Revelation and how that unfolding is structured through the covenants.

I. The Importance of Covenants in the Bible

A. The Word “Covenant”

Covenants appear throughout the Bible. The Hebrew word for covenant, berith, occurs approximately 284 times in the Old Testament. The corresponding Greek word, diathēkē, occurs 33 times in the New Testament. The vocabulary of covenant therefore appears more than three hundred times in Scripture.

Several Latin terms are also used in discussions of covenant theology. Pactum means a pact or covenant. The phrase pactum salutis, “the covenant of salvation,” is another name for the covenant of redemption. The Latin word foedus also means covenant and gives us the English word federal. For this reason, “covenant theology” is sometimes called “federal theology.” A third term is testamentum, from which we derive “testament.” The Old Testament and New Testament are the old covenant and new covenant.

The word covenant is not limited to the great theological covenants. Scripture also uses it for ordinary agreements between human beings. These human covenants provide an analogy by which we may understand God’s covenantal dealings with his people.

B. What Is a Covenant?

1. Covenants Are Made by Swearing an Oath

Genesis 21:27–32

Genesis 21 describes a covenant between Abraham and Abimelech. Abimelech recognized that God was with Abraham and asked him to swear that he would not deal falsely with him or his descendants. Abraham agreed.

A dispute had arisen because Abimelech’s servants had seized a well that Abraham had dug. Abraham gave sheep and oxen to Abimelech, and the two men made a covenant. Abraham also set apart seven ewe lambs as a witness that he had dug the well. The place was called Beersheba, “the well of the oath,” because the two men swore an oath there.

“So Abraham took sheep and oxen and gave them to Abimelech, and the two men made a covenant.… Therefore that place was called Beersheba, because there both of them swore an oath. So they made a covenant at Beersheba.” (Gen. 21:27, 31–32)

The passage alternates between the language of swearing and the language of covenant-making.

• Abimelech asks Abraham to swear (v 23)
• Abraham says, “I will swear” (v 24)
• the two men make a covenant (v 27)
• they swear an oath (v 31)
• the text again states that they made a covenant (v 32).

Covenant and oath are therefore closely related. They are not strictly synonymous, but an oath is the means by which a covenant is solemnly established.

This example also shows that covenant-making belongs to ordinary human life. God takes a recognizable human institution and uses it analogically to reveal the nature of his relationship with his people.

Deuteronomy 29:12

The same connection appears in a theological covenant between God and Israel. Deuteronomy 29 records the renewal of the covenant in Moab before Israel entered the promised land. The original covenant had been made at Horeb, or Mount Sinai, forty years earlier.

Moses gathered the entire congregation and reminded them of God’s mighty acts: his deliverance from Egypt, his signs and wonders, and his preservation of Israel in the wilderness. Moses then commanded them to keep the words of the covenant.

Deuteronomy 29:12 says:

“That you may enter into the covenant with the LORD your God, and into His oath which the LORD your God is making with you today.” (NASB)

The ESV rightly renders “the covenant … and His oath” as “the sworn covenant of the LORD your God.” These are not two unrelated acts. The covenant is an oath-bound covenant, established by solemn swearing.

The same relationship appears in the Abrahamic covenant. Zechariah praises God:

“To show the mercy promised to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, the oath that he swore to our father Abraham.” (Luke 1:72–73)

God’s holy covenant is identified with the oath sworn to Abraham.

2. Kline’s Definition: “Oath-Bound Commitment”

Meredith G. Kline offered a concise definition of covenant: an oath-bound, divinely sanctioned commitment (Kingdom Prologue, 4).

The first element is commitment. A covenant involves a commitment to do something. The nature of that commitment varies according to the covenant. God may commit himself to bless, or human beings may commit themselves to obey.

We should therefore be careful not to use promise as an exact synonym for every covenant commitment. Paul emphasizes that the Abrahamic covenant had the character of a promise: God guaranteed a blessing that Abraham received by faith. The covenant at Sinai, however, required Israel to obey God’s law. Israel’s commitment was not to bestow a gracious blessing upon God but to keep his commandments.

The second element is oath-bound commitment. The oath solemnizes the commitment and attaches sanctions to it. In biblical oaths, a person may invoke judgment upon himself if he fails to fulfill his word:

“May God do so to me and more also if I fail to do this.”

The oath is therefore a conditional self-curse. The covenant-maker commits himself to act and invokes judgment if he breaks that commitment.

3. Two Major Types of Covenants

This distinction gives rise to two broad kinds of covenant: promise covenants and law covenants.

Promise Covenants

In a promise covenant, God takes the oath. He places himself, so to speak, under the covenantal sanction and guarantees the promised blessing. When God swears by himself, the blessing is made certain because God cannot fail to keep his word: “By myself I have sworn.” The proper human response is faith.

The classic instance of a promise covenant is the Abrahamic covenant. God promised Abraham descendants as numerous as the stars of heaven. Abraham and Sarah were old, and Sarah was barren, but Abraham believed God. Genesis 15:6 says:

“And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.”

Romans 4 explains that Abraham was fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised.

Law Covenants

In a law covenant, human beings take the oath and assume the covenantal sanctions. The Mosaic covenant, for example, contained blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. Israel was obligated to keep the law and would come under judgment if it broke the covenant.

This distinction provides a covenantal foundation for the Reformed distinction between law and gospel. The law requires perfect obedience as the condition of life: “Do this and live.”

It pronounces a curse upon the one who fails to continue in all that is written in the law. The gospel announces God’s gracious promise and calls us to receive the blessing by faith.

Covenant theology therefore clarifies both the gospel and the Christian life. As Christians our standing before God is dictated, not by a law covenant dependent upon our obedience, but by a promise covenant grounded in Christ’s obedience.

C. The Covenant Relationship Between God and His People

The covenant of grace establishes a relationship between God and his people. For example, in Psalm 25:14 we read:

“The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him, and he makes known to them his covenant.”

The covenant is described as friendship with God. Human friendship covenants provide an analogy. David and Jonathan entered into a covenant of friendship. Marriage provides another analogy. Malachi 2:14 describes a man’s wife as “your wife by covenant.” Scripture consequently portrays the LORD as the husband of his people and Christ as the bridegroom of the church.

A recurring covenant formula expresses this relationship:

“I will be your God, and you shall be my people.” (Lev. 26:12)

This language appears throughout the Old Testament and reaches its fulfillment in the new covenant. This bond is characterized by God’s hesed: his steadfast covenant love and faithfulness.

Not every biblical covenant has this intimate character. The Noahic covenant after the flood was made with all humanity and even with the created order. It does not by itself establish the special saving fellowship expressed in the covenant formula. The covenant of grace, however, is centrally a bond of fellowship between God and his redeemed people.

Christ, the Substance of the Covenant of Grace

Covenant theology is ultimately about Christ. Christ is the substance of the covenant of grace. Through him, God is our God and we are his people.

This is why covenant theology has practical importance. It clarifies the gospel and the work of Christ. It defines the believer’s relationship to God through Christ, the mediator of the covenant. It also illuminates the sacraments as signs and seals by which God confirms his covenant promises and strengthens our assurance.

On the road to Emmaus, Jesus began with Moses and all the Prophets and interpreted to the disciples “in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Lk 24:27). Covenant theology helps us read Scripture in a Christ-centered manner.

D. The Prominence of Covenant in the New Testament

1. Jesus and the New Covenant

The New Testament is itself a covenantal book. Its very name means “the new covenant”. The four Gospels describe the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of the new covenant through his person and work.

At the Last Supper, Jesus declared:

“This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Luke 22:20; cf. 1 Cor. 11:25)

As he prepared to go to the cross, he interpreted his death as the sacrifice by which the new covenant would be established. His words allude to the promise of the new covenant in Jeremiah 31.

The New Testament therefore presents Christ as the covenant mediator. Through his life, obedience, death, and resurrection, he secured forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

2. Paul

Paul develops covenant theology in several places. In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul writes that God

“has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant.” (2 Cor. 3:6)

He contrasts the new covenant with the old. In Galatians 3, he distinguishes the law, which came 430 years after the promise, from the promise made to Abraham. The Mosaic covenant functions as a law covenant, while the Abrahamic covenant has the character of promise.

Galatians 4 uses Sarah and Hagar allegorically to represent two covenants: one associated with slavery and the other with freedom in Christ.

3. The Letter to the Hebrews

Hebrews 8–10 contains an extended exposition of Jeremiah 31:31–34. The author explains that Christ is the mediator of a better covenant established on better promises. Hebrews also speaks of Christ’s blood as “the blood of the eternal covenant” (Heb. 13:20).

Covenant theology is therefore not imposed upon Scripture from the outside. It arises naturally from the New Testament’s own presentation of the relationship between the old and new covenants.

E. The Apostolic Fathers and Church Fathers

The early church possessed a rudimentary covenant theology because Christians immediately had to ask how the old covenant related to the new.

The Epistle of Barnabas, written in the early second century, interpreted Old Testament institutions typologically in light of Christ. Some of its interpretations are speculative, but its basic instinct was to read the Old Testament as pointing toward Christ and the new covenant.

Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho interpreted circumcision, Sabbath observance, and other Old Testament institutions christologically. Irenaeus also discussed the relationship between the old and new covenants. Augustine gave especially careful attention to both their harmony and their differences.

The church fathers did not yet possess the fully developed Reformed formulation of the covenant of works, the covenant of redemption, and the covenant of grace. Nevertheless, the basic elements of covenant theology were present because the biblical relationship between the two testaments could not be ignored.

During the Middle Ages, covenant themes remained present but did not generally function as the controlling framework for theology. Greater emphasis was placed upon the institutional church and its sacramental system.

II. A Brief Survey of the History of Reformed Covenant Theology

A. The Anabaptists and the Reformed Response

1. Zwingli and the Swiss Reformation

Reformed covenant theology began to take recognizable shape during the Swiss Reformation, particularly in debates over baptism. In 1525, Huldrych Zwingli debated Anabaptists in Zürich. The Anabaptists rejected infant baptism and regarded the religion of Old Testament Israel as fundamentally earthly and carnal. In response, Zwingli argued for the continuity of the covenant of grace. The children of believers belong to the covenant community just as children did under the old covenant. Baptism under the new covenant corresponds to circumcision under the old.

The issue wasn’t just about infant baptism. It concerned how Christians should read the Old Testament and understand the faith of Old Testament believers. Were Abraham, Joseph, David, and the other saints interested merely in land, descendants, and earthly prosperity? Or did they possess the same saving faith as Christians? The New Testament clearly teaches the latter. Romans 4 presents Abraham as the father and pattern of all who believe. Hebrews 11 says that the patriarchs sought a heavenly country and a city with foundations, whose designer and builder is God. Their earthly inheritance was a type of the heavenly inheritance.

2. Bullinger

Heinrich Bullinger, Zwingli’s colleague and successor, published Concerning the One and Eternal Testament or Covenant of God in 1534. The title expresses the basic Reformed conviction that there is one covenant of grace extending through the Old and New Testaments.

3. Calvin

Calvin addressed the same subject in Institutes of the Christian Religion, book 2, chapter 10, “The Resemblance Between the Old Testament and the New”:

“All whom, from the beginning of the world, God adopted as his peculiar people, were taken into covenant with him on the same conditions, and under the same bond of doctrine, as ourselves.… The Fathers were partakers with us in the same inheritance, and hoped for a common salvation through the grace of the same Mediator.”

There are real differences between the old and new administrations: promise and fulfillment, type and reality, shadow and substance, and the ceremonial order associated with Israel. Yet beneath these differences lies a fundamental unity of saving faith.

Covenant theology is therefore essential not merely for the doctrine of baptism but for reading the Bible as one history of redemption centered upon one promise fulfilled in Christ.

C. Covenant in the Reformed Confessions

1. The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 7

2. “The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.”

3. “Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein he freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life his Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.”

5. “This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the gospel: under the law, it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all fore-signifying Christ to come; which were, for that time, sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the old testament.”

6. “Under the gospel, when Christ, the substance, was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.… There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.”

2. Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 74

“Infants as well as adults are included in God’s covenant and people.… Therefore, by baptism, the sign of the covenant, they too should be incorporated into the Christian church and distinguished from the children of unbelievers.”

3. Belgic Confession and Canons of Dort

Belgic Confession, article 34, treats baptism as the sign and seal of God’s covenant. The Canons of Dort speak of “the gracious covenant” (CD I.17) and of Christ establishing “a new covenant of grace by his blood” (CD II, RE 2).

D. Seventeenth-Century Systematization

In the seventeenth century, Reformed theologians elaborated and systematized covenant theology. Johannes Cocceius published The Doctrine of the Covenant and Testament of God in 1648. Herman Witsius published The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man: Comprehending a Complete Body of Divinity in 1677.

E. The Three Theological Covenants

Reformed covenant theology is commonly summarized under three theological covenants.

1. The Covenant of Works

The covenant of works was made with Adam in the garden. Adam was required to obey God and would receive life upon obedience. He broke the covenant through sin and brought condemnation upon himself and his descendants.

2. The Covenant of Redemption

The covenant of redemption is the eternal covenant between the Father and the Son concerning the salvation of the elect. The Son undertook to become the second Adam, obey the Father, bear the covenant curse, and secure the promised inheritance for his people.

In the order of God’s eternal decree, this covenant precedes creation and the fall. In the order of revelation, however, it comes after the fall, because the first Adam has broken the covenant of works and humanity requires a mediator.

The covenant of redemption may also be described as a covenant of works with Christ. Christ fulfills the obedience that Adam failed to render. Through his active and passive obedience, he merits the blessings of salvation for his people.

3. The Covenant of Grace

The covenant of grace is the historical administration of the benefits secured by Christ in the covenant of redemption. It begins with the first gospel promise after the fall and unfolds throughout the Old Testament in promise, type, and shadow. It reaches fulfillment in the incarnation, obedience, death, and resurrection of Christ.

The Reformers initially emphasized the covenant of grace because of their controversy with the Anabaptists. Later Reformed theologians more fully systematized the covenant of works and covenant of redemption.

The covenant of redemption and covenant of grace should ordinarily be distinguished. The covenant of redemption concerns the Father, the Son, and the salvation of the elect. The covenant of grace is administered in history through the visible church and includes professing believers and their children, although its saving substance belongs only to the elect.

The Visible Church and the Elect

Reformed covenant theology distinguishes the visible covenant community from the elect.

The visible church includes all who profess faith in Christ together with their children. Within that visible community are the elect, who have been chosen by God and will certainly be brought to saving faith and preserved to the end.

Not everyone who professes Christ is necessarily elect. Jesus warns: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 7:21). Some make false professions, and some later apostatize.

The covenant of grace therefore has an external administration that includes the visible church and an internal saving reality that belongs to the elect. Christians ordinarily receive one another according to the judgment of charity. We regard those who credibly profess faith as believers because we cannot read the heart.

The children of believers are likewise treated as members of the covenant community. They are raised under the promises of God, taught to pray, instructed in the gospel, and called to embrace Christ by faith. God uses this covenantal nurture as a means of bringing his elect children to faith.

The promise to believers and their children appears in Genesis 17, where God promises to be God to Abraham and to his offspring. It appears again in Acts 2:39:

“The promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”

III. Biblical Theology

A. Covenant Theology as the Beginning of Reformed Biblical Theology

Covenant theology stands at the intersection of systematic theology and biblical theology.

Seminaries commonly organize theology into several disciplines.

1. Exegetical theology includes Old Testament and New Testament studies, biblical languages, canonics, introduction, hermeneutics, exegesis, and biblical theology.
2. Systematic theology arranges biblical teaching by doctrine: God, the Trinity, humanity, Christ, salvation, the church, and the last things.
3. Historical theology studies the development of doctrine through the history of the church.
4. Practical theology addresses preaching, worship, apologetics, pastoral ministry, and other applications of the Word of God.

Biblical theology is a subdiscipline of exegetical theology. The term biblical in this expression does not merely mean “correct” or “faithful to the Bible.” Biblical theology is the study of the Bible’s own theology as it unfolds historically and progressively from Genesis to Revelation.

Reformed covenant theology may be regarded as an early form of Reformed biblical theology. The Reformers were asking how the different stages of revelation relate to one another and how the Old Testament leads to Christ.

C. Geerhardus Vos and Biblical Theology

Geerhardus Vos, a Dutch-American theologian who taught at Princeton Theological Seminary from 1892 to 1932, is often called the father of Reformed biblical theology. He did not invent the discipline, but he gave it a particularly clear definition and methodological foundation.

Vos defined biblical theology as:

The exhibition of the organic progress of supernatural revelation in its historic continuity and multiformity.

The word organic is important. A living organism has many interconnected systems. In the same way, the diverse stages and forms of biblical revelation belong to one developing whole. Biblical theology attends both to continuity and to multiformity: what remains the same and what changes as revelation progresses.

Vos also supplied a shorter definition:

Biblical theology is the history of special revelation.

Systematic theology considers the final doctrinal result of everything Scripture teaches. It asks, for example, what the whole Bible teaches about the attributes of God or the Trinity. Biblical theology traces how God revealed himself and his saving purpose through successive stages of history.

D. Clarifying “Special Revelation”: Word-and-Deed Revelation

Special revelation consists not only of divine words but also of divine acts.

God spoke to Abraham, Moses, the prophets, and the apostles. He also acted in history. He delivered Israel from Egypt, divided the Red Sea, appeared at Sinai, brought his people into Canaan, judged them through exile, and restored them. In the Gospels, Christ taught, healed the sick, cleansed lepers, multiplied bread, walked on water, raised the dead, died, and rose again.

A recurring biblical pattern is: word, deed, and interpretive word. God first speaks a promise or warning. He then acts in fulfillment. Afterward, he gives further revelation interpreting the theological significance of what he has done.

The ministry of Jesus unites word and deed. He raises the dead and teaches about resurrection life. His miracles are not bare displays of power but signs whose meaning is disclosed through his teaching.

We know the divine acts through the inspired words of Scripture. Scripture is not detached, supposedly neutral reporting. It narrates events and interprets them for us. Biblical history is theologically interpreted history.

E. Clarifying “History”: The Organic Progress of Revelation

The history of special revelation is an organic, progressive whole. God’s acts are not isolated wonders. He is creating a people, preparing for the Messiah, accomplishing redemption through Christ, and bringing his people toward the consummation.

One may compare this progress to assembling a complex structure. Each stage builds upon what came before. God calls Abraham and gives him promises. He forms Abraham’s descendants into a nation, delivers them from Egypt, gives them his law, establishes them in the land, raises up David, sends the prophets, and finally sends his Son.

Genesis 3:15 contains the first promise of the gospel. From that point onward, the history of revelation increasingly discloses the person and work of Christ. When Christ appears in the Gospels, his words and actions must be interpreted in light of the Old Testament organism that preceded him.

The feeding of the five thousand, for example, recalls the manna given in the wilderness. Christ is not performing an isolated miracle; he is revealing himself as the true bread from heaven.

Biblical theology is therefore more than a chronology of Israel’s kings or a reconstruction of the date of the exodus. Those historical questions matter, but biblical theology seeks the theological relationships within the history. It asks what God is doing, how one stage relates to another, and how the New Testament interprets the Old.

Baptism provides an example. First Peter relates baptism to the flood. The floodwaters were waters of judgment, yet Noah and his household were saved through those waters in the ark. The imagery also connects with Israel’s passage through the Red Sea. Biblical theology traces these recurring patterns and shows their fulfillment in Christ and the new covenant.

IV. Theological Covenants and Biblical Covenants

A. The Three Theological Covenants and the Post-Fall Biblical Covenants

1. The Three Theological Covenants

The covenant of works, covenant of redemption, and covenant of grace are called theological covenants because they are systematic formulations drawn from the whole teaching of Scripture. No single verse states, “There is a covenant of redemption,” just as no single verse gives the complete doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine is constructed by gathering and synthesizing the biblical evidence.

2. The Post-Fall Biblical Covenants

The biblical covenants, by contrast, are covenants narrated in the history of revelation:

• the Noahic covenant after the flood;
• the Abrahamic covenant;
• the Mosaic covenant with Israel at Sinai;
• the Davidic covenant; and
• the new covenant.

The Davidic covenant illustrates why a covenant need not be explicitly called a covenant at the moment it is first revealed. Second Samuel 7 records God’s promises to David without using the word covenant, but later passages identify those promises as a covenant.

The same is true of Adam. Genesis 2 does not use the word covenant, but Hosea 6:7 is traditionally understood to say:

“Like Adam they transgressed the covenant.”

The Bible itself can retrospectively identify an earlier arrangement as covenantal.

The task of covenant theology is to examine these biblical covenants and determine how they relate to the three theological covenants.

3. How the Biblical Covenants Relate to the Theological Covenants

We move from exegesis to biblical theology and then to systematic theology: from the history of special revelation to the systematic formulation of fundamental principles.

B. From Exegesis to Biblical Theology to Systematic Theology

1. The Bible’s Own Theological Synthesis

The Bible itself moves from individual covenantal episodes to broader theological synthesis.

God’s covenant promises to the patriarchs were revealed and renewed at several points: to Abraham in Genesis 15 and 17, to Isaac in Genesis 26, and to Jacob in Genesis 28 and 35. A merely atomistic reading might treat these as several unrelated covenants.

Scripture, however, views them as one covenant:

“And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant (singular) with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.” (Exod. 2:24)

Psalm 105:8–11 likewise declares:

He remembers his covenant forever,
the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations,
the covenant that he made with Abraham,
his sworn promise to Isaac,
which he confirmed to Jacob as a statute,
to Israel as an everlasting covenant,
saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan
as your portion for an inheritance.”

The Bible combines the several patriarchal revelations into one everlasting covenant. It therefore performs its own biblical and systematic theology: it takes the individual historical acts, identifies their organic unity, and expresses that unity in a broader theological category.

Biblical theologians consequently observe continuity from the protevangelium in Genesis 3:15 to Abraham, and from Abraham to the new covenant in Galatians 3. Scripture calls it

“the everlasting covenant.” (Ps. 105:10; Heb. 13:20)

The result is one covenant of grace unfolding from Genesis 3:15 to eternity.

This provides the warrant for our own method. We begin with exegesis, trace the history of revelation through biblical theology, and formulate the resulting doctrine through systematic theology.

Covenant theology is the meeting point of these disciplines. It enables us to see the Bible as one organically developing history of redemption, structured by covenants and fulfilled in Jesus Christ.