How Is the Rainbow a Sign of the Covenant?

By Nick Batzig

Several years ago, my wife and I were driving back home from a trip out of town. At some point, we missed the exit sign on the highway leading to the town in which we lived. We drove for nearly thirty minutes before realizing that we were heading to the wrong city. We had completely missed the sign. Failing to see or to understand physical signs can result in unfavorable consequences; the same is true of failing to rightly understand God’s covenantal signs. This is evident today in the way many parade their sexual rebellion against God under the banner of a rainbow.

In redemptive history, the Lord established the covenant of grace with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and Christ. With each administration of the covenant of grace, God gave various divine signs. He set apart the rainbow in the sky to serve as the sign of the Noahic covenant. The Noahic covenant was God’s pledge that He would sustain the created order (Gen. 9:9–13). Because of His promise not to destroy the earth, mankind could be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth (Gen. 9:1). In this sense, the Noahic covenant was a unique administration of the covenant of grace in that it contained a principle of common grace.

However, the Noahic covenant was ultimately serving the redemptive purposes of God. God was renewing the covenant promise He made to Adam when He inaugurated the covenant of grace (Gen. 3:15). In the Noahic covenant, God was setting the stage for the unfolding of redemptive history. Christ was in the lineage of Noah (Luke 3:23–38). Noah stood as a type of Christ, the head of a new creation (Gen. 8:13–19; 9:1–7). The ark itself served as a microcosm of redemptive history. The clean animals in the ark belonged to the Old Testament sacrificial system and typified the sacrifice of Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (Gen. 8:20; Ex. 12; John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:19). Clean and unclean animals together represented the Jews and gentiles, for whose salvation Christ came into the world (Acts 10:9–48; 11:18).

God set the bow in the sky to serve as the sign of the Noahic covenant—signifying His promise of redemption (Gen. 9:8–17). In his vision of the heavenly throne room, the Apostle John saw a rainbow around the throne of God and the Lamb (Rev. 4:3). Jonathan Edwards explained the significance of this rainbow around the throne in John’s vision when he wrote:

The rainbow we know was appointed of God as a token of his gracious covenant with mankind. God is encompassed with a rainbow, which signifies that as he sits and reigns, and manifests himself in his church, he appears as encompassed with mercy. As of old, the throne of God in the holy of holies, where God manifested himself in the church of Israel, was called the mercy-seat, so here there is a rainbow, the sign of God’s gracious covenant, round about the throne that he sits on.[1]

The rainbow is a sign of God’s redeeming grace and mercy. The Hebrew word translated “rainbow” is properly translated “war bow.” By placing His bow in the sky, the Lord was symbolically aiming a weapon of judgment at Himself. As Sinclair Ferguson explains:

The word used in the book of Genesis is not rainbow, it is war bow: the bow of war, the bow of battle. It is a picture of God, after hostility has ended and He has established a new creation, flinging His bow of judgment into the skies as a reassurance to Noah. “Now that there is reconciliation, you may enjoy the peace that you have with Me. You can be sure that there will never again be this kind of judgment on the earth—until, of course, the cosmic final judgment of all at the end of time.” . . . If you think about the rainbow as God’s military bow transformed into an ornament of great beauty that hostility has ceased, and that there is no arrow in the bow, the only place the arrow could have gone was into His own heart.[2]

In setting the bow apart to serve as the sign of His covenantal promise, the Lord said to Noah, “When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant” (Gen. 9:16). Of course, God doesn’t need to be reminded of anything. Rather, in gracious condescension He determined to give us greater certainty of His promise. In this sense, the rainbow is the sign that the Lord will preserve the present creation until the consummation of the covenant of grace when He will fully redeem His people from every tongue, tribe, and nation and bring them into the full enjoyment of a new creation. The sign of the Noahic covenant is therefore a gospel sign of the redeeming mercy of God in Christ (Isa. 54:9–10).

This article is part of the Signs of the Covenant collection.

1. Jonathan Edwards, “Notes on Scripture,” The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol. 15, ed. Harry S. Stout and Stephen J. Stein (London; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998), 224–225.
2. Sinclair Ferguson, “The Hope of Noah,” Park Cities Presbyterian Church, Dallas, Texas, September 29, 2004, https://pcpc.org/resources/midweek-audio/detail/7934/the-hope-of-noah/.

How Is the Sabbath a Sign of the Covenant?

By Nick Batzig

It has become increasingly common for business professionals, life coaches, and pastors to talk about embracing sabbath or taking a sabbatical. The idea is that people need prolonged seasons of rest and refreshment. The focus on taking a sabbath is, of course, that people would become more productive in their employments while also caring for their spiritual, physical, and emotional well-being.

While sabbaticals may address a common, therapeutic need for rest, God has given us the Sabbath day to serve as a sign of the greater spiritual need we have for the rest that He provides in Christ alone. From the beginning of time, the Sabbath day was set as one of God’s creation ordinances (Gen. 2:2–3). In redemptive history, it was the fourth of the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). Both at creation and in the fourth commandment, the Sabbath served as a covenantal sign holding out the promise of a greater Sabbath rest.

After creating a world in which His image bearers could dwell, the Lord set apart the seventh day as the Sabbath day. The Sabbath day served numerous purposes at creation. It was to be a day of worship and rest. It was also a reminder that mankind is finite and dependent. Since we are dependent creatures, God saw fit to give Adam this creation ordinance to remind him of his need for rest from his physical labor. Adam was to set apart the Sabbath day to worship the God who “gives to all mankind life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25).

However, it was not simply a day in which man was to cease from his labors and embrace physical and spiritual rest; it was a sign pointing to something higher—the hope of entering eternal rest. The eschatological-sign nature of the Sabbath day was tied to God’s covenantal dealing with man in the garden. In Eden, God condescended to initiate a covenantal relationship with Adam. Had Adam obeyed the command related to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, it’s likely he would have secured an eternal dwelling place for righteous image bearers to reflect the holy character of God. Had he obeyed, he would have gained a right to eat from the Tree of Life. The two trees in the garden served as signs and seals of the covenant of works, together with the Sabbath day. That is, the Sabbath ordinance was one of the signs and seals of this covenant in Eden. The Sabbath was a sign insomuch as it pointed to the promise of the eternal rest that man would have entered had Adam obeyed the demands of the covenant of works.

In redemptive history, the Sabbath prominently resurfaced again as a covenantal sign in the Mosaic covenant. Within the context of the Mosaic covenant, the Sabbath day continued to point to the promise of eternal rest. These two elements of the Sabbath day—creation and redemption—are found in the distinct reasons added to the fourth commandment in Exodus 20:11 and Deuteronomy 5:15. Creation and redemption form the background for the significance of the Sabbath day as a covenantal sign. The Sabbath day reminds image bearers of their obligation to worship and serve the Lord, and to trust God for the redemption that He freely provides in Christ alone. Where Adam failed in the covenant of works, Christ succeeded.

As the last Adam (Rom. 5:12–21), Jesus came to secure the eschatological Sabbath rest for His people. Jesus performed numerous healing miracles on the old covenant Sabbath day, revealing Himself to be the One who alone can provide rest for the souls of His people. The restorative Sabbath-day healings foreshadowed the ultimate healing that Christ secured for believers in the resurrection on the last day. The Sabbath healing of the man with the withered hand (Matt. 12:9–14) was tied to Jesus’ gospel invitation: “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matt. 11:28–29, emphasis added). Jesus purchased eschatological Sabbath rest for His people by taking upon Himself the judgment they deserve when He hung under the wrath of God on the cross. Picking up on Psalm 95:7–11, the writer of Hebrews alluded to the abiding hope of entering into eternal rest in glory with Christ, since Jesus entered into His everlasting rest (Heb. 3:7–4:12).

The circumstances surrounding the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ provide further basis for our understanding of Jesus as the Rest Provider. Just as He looked back over His newly created world and pronounced it good, the Son of God looked back over the completed work of redemption and cried out, “It is finished” (Gen. 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31; John 19:27). Having finished His labor to provide redemption, Jesus rested as His body lay in the ground on the old covenant Sabbath day. When He rose on the first day of the week, Jesus ushered in the Christian Sabbath (i.e., the Lord’s Day of Rev. 4:3).

In the New Testament, the saving work of Christ forms the basis of the change of the Sabbath day from the seventh to the first day of the week. Just as Jesus rose on the first day of the week, so He appeared to the disciples on the first day of each subsequent week (Luke 24:1; John 20:26). As the Westminster Confession of Faith explains:

As it is of the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in his Word . . . he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him: which, from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and, from the resurrection of Christ, was changed into the first day of the week, which, in Scripture, is called the Lord’s Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world, as the Christian Sabbath. (21.7)

The covenant Lord continues to call us to set apart one day in seven to worship on the new covenant Sabbath. Just as the creational Sabbath served the purpose of holding out the hope of an eternal blessing, the Sabbath continues to be held out as it helps us reflect more purposefully on the heavenly nature of the worship we bring to God and the Lamb. While we worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the Sabbath on the first day of the week in commemoration of His resurrection glory, we eagerly await the full revelation of the One who secured Sabbath rest for us by His death and resurrection.

This article is part of the Signs of the Covenant collection.

How Was Circumcision a Sign of the Covenant?

By Nick Batzig

Early on in my pastoral ministry, I decided to preach a sermon series through Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Throughout the series, I dealt with the passages that referenced the old covenant sign of circumcision. After addressing the subject of circumcision several Sundays in a row, I was approached by a congregant who wanted to express his disapproval of me preaching “something of such a sensitive nature as circumcision” since young children were present. In response, I asked if he believed that I should faithfully preach God’s Word. He said, “Of course!” I then asked if he believed that I should faithfully preach from every part of God’s Word (i.e., Law, Wisdom, Prophets, Gospels, Epistles, and apocalyptic literature). “Absolutely,” he replied. Recognizing that he didn’t understand the prevalence of circumcision throughout Scripture or that God gave it as a sign of the covenant promise in the old covenant era of redemptive history, I explained that one would have to refrain from preaching a large portion of the Bible if he could not talk about the meaning of circumcision.

Misunderstandings about circumcision should come as no surprise to us. After all, even many in old covenant Israel failed to rightly understand the nature of the covenant sign of circumcision. Instead of trusting in the Christ to whom it pointed, they trusted in it as a badge of ethnic superiority. Instead of seeing it as the divinely appointed gospel sign of God’s covenant, they viewed it as a fleshly mark of merit. Several factors contribute to this ongoing misunderstanding of the nature of circumcision as a covenant sign in our day.

The first thing that contributes to misunderstandings about circumcision is that the Apostles largely spoke of it in negative terms when they referenced it in their preaching or included it in their epistles. This was necessary since the Judaizers (as well as other groups of Jewish false teachers) were spreading a false gospel among the members of the fledgling churches, insisting that circumcision was necessary for salvation (see Acts 15:1, 5; Gal. 2; 5:3; 6:11–15). To deal decisively with these errors, the Apostles spoke strongly against the need for circumcision. The Judaizers were telling the gentile Christians, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (see Acts 15:1). The Apostles made clear that this was a false gospel. As a notable exception, the Apostles also speak about the blessing of regeneration for elect Jews and gentiles using the term circumcision (see Col. 2:11–13).

The second contributing factor is that many people today have never been taught the typological function of circumcision in redemptive history. After giving Abraham exceedingly great and precious promises, the Lord commanded him to give the covenant sign of circumcision to all the males in his household on the eighth day (see Gen. 17:11–14). Closely related to the covenant promise itself, the Lord calls the sign of circumcision “My covenant” (Gen. 17:10). God commanded Abraham to apply the sign of circumcision to the male reproductive organ since, in procreation, spiritual corruption passes from generation to generation. This corruption started with Adam and spread to all his posterity—Christ alone excluded. Since all have received a sin nature from Adam, God promised that He would deal with that corruption and bring renewal by means of a bloody judgment. In this way, circumcision was typifying the covenant promises of the gospel.

The typological nature of circumcision as a gospel sign is understood by the two-fold way in which it conveys a promise. Though it was the first of the laws given to Israel, circumcision resurfaced in the Mosaic covenant in relation to the law of God with its promised blessings and curses. Circumcision, then, represented God’s covenant promise of curse and blessing. First, circumcision carried the promise of judgment for those who broke covenant with God. If someone rejected the covenant sign, he was rejecting the covenant Lord of the sign. If someone rejected the covenant Lord, he or she would incur the judgment of God. The act of “cutting” formed the signatory element of circumcision. The cutting away of the foreskin of the flesh denoted God’s promise to cut off covenant breakers from His presence, His people, and His blessing.

Simultaneously, the sign of circumcision represented the cutting away of the filth of the fallen, sinful human nature. This was the promise of covenant blessing in the gospel. If the demands of the covenant were met, God would fulfill His promise to cut off the sin of His people. The promise of spiritual renewal was also intimately bound to the promise typified in the sign of circumcision. The fact that God commanded it to be applied to all the male offspring on the eighth day represented this sign aspect of the new creation. In a seven-day week, the first and the eighth day are the same. As the first day represents the day of creation in Scripture, the eighth day in the old covenant often represented the new creation. John Calvin suggested: “It is probable and consonant with reason, that the number seven designated the course of the present life. Therefore the eighth day might seem to be fixed upon by the Lord, to prefigure the beginning of a new life.”[1]

Circumcision, like the Passover, also served as a blood sign of the gospel. Blood had to be shed if God was going to justly cut away the corruption of fallen human nature. This points to the blood of Christ as the fulfillment of that which circumcision typified in the old covenant. Circumcision pointed to the need for the bloodshed of Jesus. Significantly, Jesus first shed blood when He was circumcised on the eighth day (see Luke 2:21). This was part of the redemptive-historical nature of the covenant sign of circumcision. It signified that for which Christ had come into the world. As John Owen explained, “Every act almost of Christ’s obedience, from the blood of his circumcision to the blood of his cross, was attended with suffering,—so that his whole life might, in that regard, be called a death.”[2] Jonathan Edwards also suggested that “in his circumcision, what [Christ] suffered . . . had the nature of satisfaction, the blood that was shed in his circumcision was propitiatory blood; but as it was a conformity to the law of Moses it was part of his meritorious righteousness.”[3]

On the cross, Jesus fulfilled the promise of God to die for the sins of His people (see Col. 2:11–14). The sins of the elect were imputed to Him, and the floodwaters of God’s wrath were poured out on Him as the object of God’s covenant curses. Jesus was “cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8). The promise of covenant curse, typified in the “cutting off” element of circumcision, was enacted against Jesus at Calvary. By His sacrifice, Jesus “cuts off” the filth of our sin. Christ became a curse for us so that we might become the recipients of the covenant blessings by faith in Him (see Gal. 3:10–14).

This article is part of the Signs of the Covenant collection.

1. John Calvin, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans. John King, vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), 455.
2. John Owen, The Works of John Owen, ed. William H. Goold, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, n.d.), 161–162.
3. Jonathan Edwards, “Sermon Fifteen,” in A History of the Work of Redemption, ed. John F. Wilson and John E. Smith, vol. 9, The Works of Jonathan Edwards (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1989), 307–308.

What Is the Covenant of Redemption?

By R.C. Sproul

A persistent tradition claims that upon being mocked by a skeptic with regard to his doctrine of creation, Saint Augustine was cynically asked, “What was God doing before He created the world?” Augustine’s alleged reply was: “Creating hell for curious souls.”

The reply was, of course, tongue-in-cheek. The Bible doesn’t speak of such a special work of divine creation before creation itself. But Augustine’s bon mot had a serious point that warned against idle speculation of God’s activity in eternity.

However, quite apart from speculation, the Bible has much to say about God’s activity “before” the world was made. The Bible speaks often of God’s eternal counsel, of His plan of salvation and the like. It is a matter of theological urgency that Christians not think of God as a ruler who ad libs His dominion of the universe. God does not “make it up as He goes along.” Nor must He be viewed as a bumbling administrator who is so inept in His planning that His blueprint for redemption must be endlessly subject to revision according to the actions of men. The God of Scripture has no “plan b” or “plan c.” His “plan a” is from everlasting to everlasting. It is both perfect and unchangeable as it rests on God’s eternal character, which is among other things, holy, omniscient, and immutable. God’s eternal plan is not revised because of moral imperfections within it that must be purified. His plan was not corrected or amended because He gained new knowledge that He lacked at the beginning. God’s plan never changes because He never changes and because perfection admits to no degrees and cannot be improved upon.

The covenant of redemption is intimately concerned with God’s eternal plan. It is called a “covenant” inasmuch as the plan involves two or more parties. This is not a covenant between God and humans. It is a covenant among the persons of the Godhead, specifically between the Father and the Son. God did not become triune at creation or at the Incarnation. His triunity is as eternal as His being. He is one in essence and three in person from all eternity.

The covenant of redemption is a corollary to the doctrine of the Trinity. Like the word trinity, the Bible nowhere explicitly mentions it. The word trinity does not appear in the Bible, but the concept of the Trinity is affirmed throughout Scripture. Likewise, the phrase “covenant of redemption” does not occur explicitly in Scripture but the concept is heralded throughout.

Central to the message of Jesus is the declaration that He was sent into the world by the Father. His mission was not given to Him at His baptism or in the manger. He had it before His incarnation.

In the great “Kenotic Hymn” of Philippians 2, we get a glimpse of this:

Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:5–11, NKJV)

This passage reveals many things. It speaks of the willingness of the Son to undertake a mission of redemption at the behest of the Father. That Jesus was about doing the will of the Father is testified throughout His life. As a young boy in the temple He reminded His earthly parents that He must be about His Father’s business. His meat and drink was to do the will of His Father. It was zeal for His Father’s house that consumed Him. Repeatedly He declared that He spoke not on His own authority but on the authority of the One who sent Him.

Jesus is the primary missionary. As the word suggests, a missionary is one who is “sent.” The eternal Word did not decide on His own to come to this planet for its redemption. He was sent here. In the plan of salvation the Son comes to do the Father’s bidding.

The point of the covenant of redemption is that the Son comes willingly. He is not coerced by the Father to relinquish His glory and be subjected to humiliation. Rather, He willingly “made Himself of no reputation.” The Father did not strip the Son of His eternal glory but the Son agreed to lay it aside temporarily for the sake of our salvation.

Listen to Jesus as He prays to the Father at the end of His ministry: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You; And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:1–5 NKJV). The covenant of redemption was a transaction that involved both obligation and reward. The Son entered into a sacred agreement with the Father. He submitted Himself to the obligations of that covenantal agreement. An obligation was likewise assumed by the Father—to give His Son a reward for doing the work of redemption.

In his systematic theology, Charles Hodge lists eight promises the Father gave to the Son in this pact made in eternity. Briefly they are: that God would form a purified Church for His Son; that the Son would receive the Spirit without measure; that He would be ever-present to support Him; that He would deliver Him from death and exalt Him to His right hand; that He would have the Holy Spirit to send to whom He willed; that all the Father gave to Him would come to Him and none of these be lost; that multitudes would partake of His redemption and His messianic kingdom; that He would see the travail of His soul and be satisfied.

Because God honored the eternal covenant of redemption, Christ became the heir of His Father’s promises. Because this covenant was never violated, we reap its benefits as heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.

How Was the Passover a Sign of the Covenant?

By Nick Batzig

Of all the Old Testament images that foreshadow Jesus, the Passover lamb was perhaps the clearest in foreshadowing Jesus’ saving work at Calvary. According to God’s own appointment, God promised to remove His judgment from His people when He saw the substitutionary blood of a spotless lamb painted on the doorposts of the Israelites’ homes in Egypt. The Passover was a sign of God’s covenant with His people in the Old Testament, indicating the way in which He would one day satisfy His wrath through the sacrifice of Christ.

After sin entered the world, Scripture immediately tells us that Abel gave an animal sacrifice to offer acceptable worship to the Lord (Gen. 4:4). The infinitely holy God only accepts as righteous those who come to Him by faith in the promised Redeemer, who would Himself be the atoning sacrifice for sin (Heb. 11:4). The blood of the substitutionary sacrifice is an essential element of Christian doctrine and practice. As the writer of Hebrews explains, “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb. 9:22). The blood of the God-appointed sacrifice typified the substitution of one party for another in the execution of God’s judgment. If “the wages of sin is death,” then only a substitutionary death can deliver a sinner from the righteous judgment of God (Rom. 6:23). This principle was signified clearly in the details surrounding the institution of the Passover lamb. Like its bloody counterpart, circumcision, the Passover lamb was an old covenant sacrament—a sign and seal of God’s gracious dealing with His people through atonement.

The Passover served as a sign of God’s covenant promise of redemption in Christ. The Lord gave instructions about the Passover at the time of the exodus that pointed to various aspects of the redemption that He would provide in Christ (Ex. 12; 1 Cor. 5:7). The Passover was instituted at the time of the tenth plague, the death of the firstborn. The Lord had graciously distinguished between Israel and Egypt with the first nine plagues. However, there was no distinction in this tenth and most terrible plague. If the Israelites did not follow the Lord’s instructions regarding the Passover, they would be subject to the same judgment as the Egyptians. This indicated that Israel, no less than Egypt, deserved God’s wrath and judgment because of their sin.

When He instituted the Passover, the Lord gave His covenant people highly specific instructions about the Passover lamb (Ex. 12:1–28). They were to recalibrate their calendars to the first day of the new year at the institution of the Passover (v. 2). Each household was to have a lamb (v. 3). The people were to share the lamb with their neighbors if there was too much for one household (v. 4). The lamb was to be free of any imperfection (v. 5). They were to put the blood of the lamb on the doorposts of the house (v. 7). The people of God were to roast the lamb in herbs over fire before partaking of it (vv. 8–9). They were to eat the lamb in haste, dressed and ready to depart on their spiritual pilgrimage as soon as the Lord told them to depart. Not one of the bones of the Passover lamb was to be broken (v. 46).

These specific details in the instructions concerning the Passover typified various aspects of the saving work of Christ:

• Jesus is the Passover Lamb who brings about the true exodus (Luke 9:31; 1 Cor. 5:7).
• By His sacrifice, Jesus brings about the new creation—a spiritual new creation—raising His people from spiritual death to spiritual life (2 Cor. 5:17; Eph. 2:5).
• Every home needs the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ for God to deliver those belonging to it from the judgment of God (Acts 16:31).
• Believers are called to share the good news of Christ with others (1 Peter 3:15). We must feed on Him by faith (John 6:53–58).
• Jesus is the sinless sacrifice, the “lamb without blemish and spot,” who offers Himself to God (1 Peter 1:19).
• Jesus was consumed by God’s wrath as the sacrificial Lamb (Isa. 53:4–7; Rom. 5:8–9).
• Sinners are to waste no time in trusting in Christ; rather, we are to follow Him as pilgrims through the wilderness of this world (Luke 12:35–47; 1 Peter 1:13).
• God did not allow any of Christ’s bones to be broken on the cross (John 19:36).

In these and many other ways, the unfolding of the history of redemption reveals how the Passover was a sign of God’s gracious covenant, in which He would provide the greater exodus from sin, Satan, and death by the sacrificial death of Christ. Believers confidently confess that “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor. 5:7).

Why Should I Read the Westminster Confession of Faith?

By Nick Batzig

Throughout the twentieth century, it was not uncommon for well-meaning believers in evangelical circles to say things like, “No creed but Christ; no book but the Bible.” There is a seeming plausibility to this statement since Scripture alone is the only infallible rule of faith and practice. However, church history reveals that the Christian church has long perceived a need for creedal doctrinal statements (e.g., the Nicene Creed, the Apostles’ Creed, the Athanasian Creed, etc.). During the era of the Protestant Reformation, there was an increasing need for doctrinal clarity on account of the spurious teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The Westminster Confession of Faith has long been the most well-known and most frequently appealed to Protestant confession of the seventeenth century. There are numerous reasons why believers should commit to a diligent study of the Westminster Confession of Faith. The first is its historical background; the second, its biblical priority; the third, its doctrinal fidelity; and the fourth, its spiritual applicability.

Historical Background

Among the documents produced by the Westminster Assembly are the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger Catechism, the Shorter Catechism, and the Directory for the Public Worship of God. These writings were the collaborative work of 131 of the most theologically astute Protestant minsters and professors in the United Kingdom in the seventeenth century–among whom were Presbyterian, Episcopalian, and independent pastors and theologians. The assembly also consisted of thirty combined laymen from the House of Commons and House of Lords, and a Scottish delegation of advisory commissioners. From 1643–1649, the assembly met for a total of 1163 sessions. It was convened at the behest of the English Parliament with the express purpose of setting out a succinct summary of Protestant doctrine. Parliament had tasked the assembly with revising the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England.

Given the ecumenical nature of the members of the assembly, the Westminster Confession of Faith was a cooperative document–the product of men with a variety of theological beliefs coming together to articulate a unified statement of the Christian faith. This makes the Westminster Confession of Faith one of the most theologically mature and uniquely important documents in church history.

Biblical Priority

Certain individuals have charged those who rigorously adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith with exalting it above the Scripture. However, such accusations are baseless in light of the clear teaching of the opening chapter of the Confession. Edmund Clowney has helpfully explained:

The whole Westminster Confession depends upon its teaching about the Bible itself. . .Indeed, the recovery of the teaching of the Bible about itself was the key to the liberation brought about by the Protestant Reformation. Does the final authority rest in the church or in the Bible? The first chapter of the Westminster Confession presents its clear witness to the authority of Scripture out of a sense to answer that question biblically.

The divines brought their opening chapter to a close with a statement about their belief in the supremacy of Scripture. They wrote,

The Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. (WCF 1.10)

In 1647, Scripture proofs were added to the divines’ articulation of the doctrines of the Christian faith. This act further revealed their utter commitment to the final and ultimate authority of Scripture.

Doctrinal Fidelity

The members of the Westminster Assembly were not seeking to reinvent the wheel of biblical interpretation. Rather, they were building on the labor of pastors and theologians throughout the history of the church. This is evident from their articulation of Nicene Trinitarianism in their chapter, “Of God, and of the Holy Trinity,” where they stated,

In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. (WCF 2.3)

It is equally seen in their defense of Chalcedonian Christology in the chapter, “On Christ the Mediator,” where they wrote, “Two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion” (WCF 8.2).

While the divines were building upon the central doctrinal formulations to which the church had long adhered they were also correcting and refining existing theological formulations as a result of their polemics with the Roman Catholic Church. One cannot understand the importance of the Westminster Confession of Faith without recognizing the pervasive engagement with and refutation of many of the doctrinal errors of Rome. One very clear example of this aspect of the Confession of Faith is found in the divines’ chapter, “Of the Lord’s Supper.” In the second paragraph of that chapter, they wrote:

In this sacrament Christ is not offered up to His Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sins of the quick or dead, but a commemoration of that one offering up of Himself, by Himself, upon the cross, once for all. . .so that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominably injurious to Christ’s one only sacrifice, the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect. (WCF 29.2)

Insomuch as it preserved and built upon foundational Christian doctrines, while refuting and refining other widely accepted erroneous doctrines, the Westminster Confession of Faith is recognized as one of the most doctrinally careful and precise Creeds and Confessions of the Protestant Reformation.

Spiritual Applicability

The Westminster Confession of Faith is no cold or sterile theological document. Rather, it is full of experiential application of biblical doctrine. One cannot read the divines’ chapters on adoption, sanctification, saving faith, repentance unto life, good works, perseverance, and assurance of grace and salvation (chs. 12–18) without noting the deeply practical and pastoral ways in which the doctrinal truths of Scripture have a bearing on the lives of God’s people. These chapters contain ample examples of experiential Calvinism. While the Confession of Faith is not a devotional document per se, there is a consistent devotional component to its doctrinal expositions.

The Church and Israel in the Old Testament

By Iain Duguid

In the beginning, God created Adam and Eve to be a worshipping community: He would be their God and they would be His people. The fall, however, shattered their fellowship with one another as well as with God, a division that was deepened even further in the next generation when Cain murdered his brother. The trajectory away from God begun by Cain’s line ended with a counterfeit worshipping community in Babel (Gen. 11). At the same time, a line of true worshippers ran through Seth to Abram—Abraham—whom God promised to make a great nation and through whom He promised to bless all nations of the earth (Gen. 12:1–3).

God promised Abraham’s grandson Jacob that He would make his twelve sons into a harmonious worshipping “community of nations” (Gen. 28:3) that would be known by his new name, “Israel.” Significantly, the Hebrew word used here for “community” is qāhāl, which the Greek translation of the Old Testament often renders as ekklēsia, “church.” This goal of a worshipping community was reached after the exodus from Egypt when the people came to Mount Sinai. There God declared the Israelites to be His treasured possession, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Ex. 19:5–6). The Lord promised to dwell among them as their God (Ex. 29:45). But the people had no sooner committed themselves to this covenant relationship with the Lord than they abandoned Him. While Moses was at the top of the mountain receiving instruction from the Lord, the people were at the bottom fashioning false gods. It was clear from the outset that the “holy nation” had no power to live up to its calling.

The prophets unfold for us the rest of Israel’s history: in spite of God’s faithfulness to them, they were corrupt and rebellious children (Isa. 1:2) and an adulterous wife (Hos. 1–3). This heritage of unfaithfulness belonged equally to the northern and southern kingdoms: Israel and Judah were two twisted sisters from the same family (Ezek. 16; 23) who would each face the punishment of destruction and exile (Ezek. 4:4–6). The Lord could not dwell in the midst of such an unholy people. He abandoned His chosen dwelling place in Jerusalem, leaving His people at the mercy of their Babylonian enemies (Ezek. 8–11).

Yet the destruction of Israel in the exile could not be the end of the story. Because the Lord had attached His name to Israel, the nation would have to be restored lest His holy name be profaned among the nations (Ezek. 20:14). The promises made at Mount Sinai had to be fulfilled (Jer. 33:20–21), so the two nations of Israel and Judah would be restored by the Lord into a single, reunited body made up of all of the clans of Israel (Jer. 31:1) under a single king (Ezek. 37:16–22). The most important promise was the spiritual transformation of Israel into a new people whose unresponsive hearts would be changed into new hearts under a new covenant (Jer. 31:31–33) by an outpouring of God's Spirit (Ezek. 36:22–28). The new Israel would become the Lord’s servant, a light for the Gentiles, bringing healing to all nations (Isa. 42:6, 10). However, the new Israel depicted in Isaiah 40–48 continued to be a struggling and weak people who needed constant exhortation to pursue obedience as well as encouragement to trust in God’s faithful love for them. To fulfill God's purposes, another, better Israel would be required, a servant who would take Israel’s place, doing what Israel was unable to do, fulfilling her calling to bring light to the nations (Isa. 49:6).

This servant “Israel” took flesh in the person of Jesus Christ. From the moment of His birth, He reenacted Israel’s history, going down to Egypt so that He could be the true son whom God called out of Egypt (Matt. 2:15, quoting Hos. 11:1). Just as Israel passed through the Red Sea, Jesus passed through the waters of baptism (Matt. 3) before being led out into the wilderness, where He successfully faced the same temptations that Israel had failed to endure (Matt. 4). At the beginning of His ministry, Jesus read aloud Isaiah 61:1–2, declaring that the Scripture had been fulfilled in His hearers’ presence (Luke 4:18–19): He was Himself the promised Servant upon whom God’s Spirit rested. As the new Israel, Jesus perfectly fulfilled the demands of the law. The new covenant that Jeremiah anticipated was established in His blood (Luke 22:20). Jesus fulfilled God’s original design for human holiness, thereby personally embodying the new Israel for which the prophets looked.

Since Jesus Christ is Himself the new Israel, all those united to Him by faith are also incorporated into the Israel of God (Gal. 6:16). He is the true vine, the classic Old Testament image for Israel, and we are His branches (John 15). Because Christ is the living cornerstone of God’s house, those who are joined to Him become living stones in that house (1 Peter 2:4–5) and can be described by the same terminology that described Israel in the Old Testament: in Christ, we are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (1 Peter 2:9–10).

Being part of this new covenant Israel is, thus, not a matter of physical descent from Abraham, but rather sharing Abraham’s repentance and faith (Luke 3:8). The new people of God includes Jews and gentiles together (Gal 3:28), as both are grafted into the new olive tree, Christ/ Israel (Rom. 11:17–24). That does not mean that God has forgotten His promises to those physically descended from Abraham (Rom. 11:1). Certainly not. But not everyone who is descended physically from Israel is part of the new Israel (Rom. 9:6). The restoration of Israel promised in the prophets is accomplished as the gospel is preached to Jerusalem and Judea (the southern kingdom), Samaria (the northern kingdom), and to the ends of the earth, thereby finally bringing God's light to the gentiles (Acts 1:8).

In the book of Revelation, John heard God’s people described as a group of 144,000 made up of the twelve tribes of Israel (Rev. 7:4–8). Yet when he looked again, he discovered that the same group was an innumerable crowd from every tribe and nation (Rev. 7:9–12). The Lord’s bride, the image used in the Old Testament for Israel, is the church and will one day be defiled by her sin no longer but beautifully adorned for her husband (Rev. 21:2). In that day, God’s original purpose and plan for Israel—to have a united, holy people belonging to Himself—will finally be fulfilled in the marriage of Christ and His church.