The Covenant Framework of Scripture: A Hermeneutical Lens for Understanding the Bible

At the core of Scripture’s teaching is the covenant relationship that exists between Yahweh and His most prized creation—humanity. An interesting subject theologically, it is also a very practical area of inquiry as well. First, it provides a framework to answer several crucial questions: “Why does the Bible teach that mankind is condemned before God? How does God plan to restore His broken relationship with humanity? What role does Jesus have in the act of restoration? And how does a restored relationship with God benefit Christians?”

Second, the covenant relationship provides a hermeneutic for interpreting various genres of Scripture. In the Pentateuch, Yahweh created the covenant community with the giving of Torah. King David functioned as the covenant representative for the nation of Israel in the kingship narratives. After the divide of Israel’s monarchy in 931 B.C., the prophets served as covenant enforcers and reminded Israel of the consequences of her obedience or disobedience to the Sinaitic Covenant [1]. Finally, in the New Testament, the covenant relationship is understood as it is fulfilled in Christ.

From Genesis to Revelation, this relationship serves as the rubric for how we understand God’s relationship to humanity and creation. Only when we comprehend our role in this covenant relationship will we truly know the spiritual blessings that come as being a part of God’s covenant community.

 The Covenant Structure

In order to understand the dynamics of the covenant relationship, we must examine the structure that defines it. As Meredith Kline has persuasively argued, the suzerainty treaty formula in its Ancient Near Eastern context was the most common diplomatic instrument for international administration of its time. He states:

In this treaty form as it had developed in the history of diplomacy in the ancient Near East a formal canonical structure was…available, needing only to be taken up and inspired by the breath of God to become altogether what the church has confessed as canon [2].

Forensic in nature, a covenant was a ratified legal oath that formed the “framework for the commitments of the relationship it defines” [3] between two given parties—one being the greater party, known as the suzerain; and the other the lesser, known as the vassal. The suzerain was sovereign and regulated the covenant stipulations, therefore obligating the vassal to keep them. By so doing, the vassal experienced the blessings pronounced within the treaty. However, if the stipulations were not obeyed, the vassal would experience the cost of disobedience through the curses sanctioned by the treaty.

The suzerain-vassal treaty is clearly illustrated through Yahweh’s relationship with Israel as contained in three primary structural elements that formulated the covenant [4]. The first element present is the historical prologue, which told of Yahweh’s provisions as the suzerain for Israel in the past. For example, before giving the Decalogue, Yahweh says to Israel, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt” (Ex. 20:2). God reminded the Israelites of His provisions from the past (as well as for the future) before establishing His covenant with them.

The second structural element present is the covenant stipulations. These are conditioned upon the faithfulness of the vassal. Again, the Ten Words of the Decalogue were conditioned upon the faithfulness of Israel, which were embedded into the regulations of the Mosaic Law.

Their faithfulness or faithlessness resulted in the third structural element—the blessings or curses. Keeping the stipulations maintained the covenant relationship that resulted in Yahweh’s blessings upon His people. For Israel, this was the promise of Canaan (Ex. 23:20-33) and, more importantly, the presence of Yahweh Himself (Ex. 24:9-11; 40:34-38) [4]. The curses, however, resulted in the reversal of the blessings as a result of her sin (Lv. 26; Dt. 28.). This came ultimately for Israel in the form of exile from Canaan through the demise of the Davidic kingdom. Restoration would once again come through covenant obedience.

These three structural elements are all found in the various covenants present in the Bible. Furthermore, they illuminate for us the covenant framework’s role in redemptive history, which is where it becomes pragmatic for the preaching and teaching of the Church.

Covenant Exile in the History of Redemption

Indeed, the history of redemption is intrinsically tied to the covenant structure. As Roy Caimpa argues, the covenant framework is the only means to understanding sin-exile-restoration motif as clarified in the redemptive story of Israel [5]. This story unfolds through the form of two CSER structures (covenant/creation-sin-exile-restoration): The first to Adam on a universal scale and the second to Israel on a national scale. The second structure is embedded into the first and provides resolution to the restoration of the first CSER structure.

The creation narrative in Genesis provides the foundation for how the CSER structure functions. In chapter one, Yahweh spoke creation into existence (ex nihilo). On the sixth day He created mankind and established them as His vice-regents over the created order (Gen. 1:28-30). In return, they were forbidden to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as their only stipulation for remaining in Eden and, thus, Yahweh’s presence. Nevertheless, Adam and Eve sinned by partaking of the tree of knowledge and were cast out of the garden, being exiled from Yahweh’s presence. Their act of sin displayed their desire for independence from Yahweh and their rejection of His provision in an attempt to become God, knowing good and evil. However, in Genesis 3:15, Yahweh promised restoration that mankind may once again experience His divine presence and exercise dominion over the earth.

Likewise, Israel’s own narrative replays on a national scale what our first parents did on a universal scale. Here, humanity’s fate is intrinsically tied to Israel’s. The covenant relationship that God established with Israel parallels that of Adam. This can be seen below:

                                    Eden                                                  Sinai

                                    God creates man                             God elects Israel

                                    Command is given                           Torah is revealed

                                    Violation                                            [Should] Israel violate the Torah

                                    Expulsion from Eden                       Exile from the Promised Land [6]

Eventually, Israel violated the covenant with Yahweh by worshiping the golden calf (which is emblematic of Israel’s continual rebellion throughout her history). Rampant idolatry led to her exile from the promise land and the dissolution of the nation-state permanently. Even after Israel’s return from exile, her former glory no longer remained (Ez. 3:12-13). Despite her newly gathered state, Israel, in some form, was still in exile.

Covenant Restoration in the History of Redemption

The only solution to exile begins with Yahweh’s redemptive covenant with Abraham. In Genesis 15, Yahweh cut a covenant with Abraham  (Gen. 14:17-24) and promised a seed to bless the nations. Though Abraham argued that no such heir had yet been given, Yahweh assured him that his seed would be as numerous as the stars of the earth. Thus, Abraham “believed the Lord and he counted it to him as righteousness” (Gen. 15:6). Upon the condition of faith the seed was promised. God then established His covenant with Abraham by passing through the pieces of animals that were set on both sides. The suzerain (Yahweh) covenanted with Himself to uphold the stipulations of the vassal (Abraham), if they were ever broken. The covenant curses, therefore, would be brought upon Yahweh if the vassal ever broke covenant. God Himself would be exiled.

 Since the locus of Christ’s redemptive work is Yahweh’s fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise, the function of the Mosaic Covenant should be interpreted within this context. Thus it stands to reason that Israel was already in a redemptive relationship with Yahweh when He established the Sinaitic Covenant. As an extension of this promise, Israel functioned as Yahweh’s means to fulfilling the Abrahamic promise by making her a “kingdom of priests” and a “holy nation” (Ex. 19:6). Thus, the Mosaic Law functioned as the child-leader (paidagōgos) [7] until the age of the New Covenant (Gal. 3:15-18, 24-25). It served as a guide from one age into the next. Despite Israel’s failure to keep her covenant obligations, Christ, the true Israel, would fulfill them.

Restoration does not end with Israel, however. Its purpose is to bring about new creation with the redemption of humanity for God is reaffirming his original intention—that we be His vice-regents over the earth (Gen. 1:28-31). Thus, believers are adopted as Yahweh’s adult sons upon entering the covenant (Gal. 4:7), showing that kingship is expressed through kinship (Mt. 6:9-10) [8]. We, as His sons, receive the benefit of Christ’s, the king, covenant faithfulness. New creation is inaugurated by the salvation of man and will be consummated at Christ’s second coming (2 Cor. 5:17-19).

What This Means for Us

The covenant structure provides a framework for understanding God’s redemptive work in the Bible, which works in and through our lives. Scripture teaches that God’s redemptive story begins with us, His children, and extends to all the earth. The covenant framework molds and shapes the relationship God has with His covenant people. This too helps us to read the Bible as canon and understand the parts in light of the whole. Not only do we understand our role in this covenant relationship, we also understand God’s redemptive work for us as it is exemplified through His son Jesus Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit.

_______________________________________

[1] Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth, third edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 184-189.

[2] Meredith Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority, second edition (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997), 37.

[3] Scott Hafemann, “The Covenant Relationship,” in Central Themes to Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity, ed. Scott Hafemann and Paul R. House (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 26.

[4] While these are not the only structural elements, the historical prologue, the covenant stipulations, and the blessings and curses, serve to illustrate what God has done in the past, what He is doing in the present, and what He will do in the future. While I would differ with him on issues of election and the function of the historical prologue, Scott Hafemann provides a thorough explanation of how these three elements function. See Hafemann, 34-40. Furthermore, some argue that his understanding of the covenant relationship eisegetes a theological construct into the individual covenants, thus misreading their individual function into redemptive history. See J. J. Niehaus, “Covenant: An Idea of the Mind,” JETS 52 [2009]: 225-246, who offers a critique.

[5] Roy Ciampa, “The History of Redemption,” in Central Themes to Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity, ed. Scott Hafemann and Paul R. House (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 255-246.

[6] Gary A. Anderson, The Genesis of Perfection: Adam and Eve in Jewish and Christian Imagination (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 120, as cited in Caimpa, 260, fn 11.

[7] F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest For Truth: Answering Life’s Inescapable Questions (Nashville: Randall House Publications, 2001) 489-498.

[8] Hafemann, 30-34; F. M. Cross, From Epic to Canon: History of Literature in Ancient Israel (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 2005), 3-21.

Further Resources

Craig G. Bartholomew and Micheal W. Goheen, The Drama of Scripture: Finding Our Place in the Biblical Story. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.

Frank Moore Cross, From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel.  Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1998.

Meredith Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority. Second edition. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1997)

Scott Hafemann and Paul R. House, eds. Central Themes to Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.

Author: Jeremy Craft

Share This Post On

What do you think? Comment Here:

SUBSCRIBE:

The best way to stay up-to-date with the HSF

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This