The original created order possessed neither hypocrites nor self-deceived nor even children by procreation. Adam and Eve lived in harmony and covenantal relationship with their Creator and were carrying out their duty as priest-kings to both keep the Garden and spread God’s reign over the face of the earth (Genesis 2:15; 1:28-30). After the Fall, that changed, but all humanity was clearly out of direct communion with God even though they were left with a promise (Genesis 3:15; 3:22). The fallen world was united only in doing evil while the promise of God remained with the line of Seth (Genesis 6:5). Although the original design was for all humanity to be in a covenant relationship with God, the fall rendered the created order out of communion with God. At this juncture in redemptive history, there was no community created by His covenant per se, but instead, a hereditary line that inherited a promise of a future covenant.

The covenant community persisted with this genealogical principle established by God’s promise to Adam and Eve and further developed in the Covenant with Abraham. Yahweh would be Israel’s God, and they would be His people in His place - a nation of priestly kings (Exodus 6:7, 19:6). Unfortunately, from the time of the Exodus, Judges, and the kings of Israel, there were many who did not believe in the promise, and their lives of disobedience to the Mosaic Law illustrated their lack of faith. This is true of Israel’s leaders in representative terms as well as the people of Israel in national terms. The essence of this covenant community, however, was not essentially salvific in eschatological terms, but typologically salvific in old creation terms. By the term, “typologically salvific,” I do not mean that Israelites, as individuals, had no expectation of a resurrection from the dead or eschatological judgment. They clearly did, but their consistent collective failure as God’s son illustrated the need for an obedient Son and Snake-crushing Seed of the Woman. At this point, it is clear that I reject Covenant Theology’s articulation of substance and administration of the Covenant of Grace, which will be further addressed in my next article.

When Christ came, He was circumcised on the 8th day, He upheld the terms of the covenant, and established a New Covenant in His blood (Luke 2:21, 4:1-13, 22:20). Thereby, the chief reason for the establishment of a genealogical promise on the edge of Eden was fulfilled by the arrival of the Seed of the Woman (See especially Luke’s genealogy in Luke 3:23-38).

Also, Christ is the covenant-keeper who has both believing Gentiles and believing Jews in Him as their new Federal Head (Ephesians 2:13-14). The previous categories of covenant mediatorship for a national people, are done away with in favor of a believing people of every tribe, tongue, and nation. Unlike previous covenantal arrangements, God is not typologically saving a nation/people for Himself, but He has eschatologically saved His elect from the first age (Israel) retroactively and from the overlap of the ages (the Church) in advance (Romans 3:22-26, Hebrews 8:6). The New Covenant is the eternal covenant through which all believers are justified; God was only just in passing over the former sins because of the blood that signed His oath at the cross (Hebrews 13:20). The first Exodus from Egypt into the Land has given way to the New Exodus from sin into the New Creation, and when shadow gives way to substance, the shadow becomes obsolete even if it remains instructive (Hebrews 7:18, Matthew 5:17, Colossians 2:17, 2 Timothy 3:16).

Part of the New Covenant promises found in the Old Testament Prophets is the assurance that “all will know the Lord” (Jer 31:34) and “In those days, it will never again be said: The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. Rather, each will die for his own wrongdoing. Anyone who eats sour grapes—his own teeth will be set on edge” (Jer 31:29-30). If these promises have now arrived in the church, then one must ask, “in what sense?” The answer depends drastically on our understanding of inaugurated eschatology. According to Covenant Theology, nearly all aspects of this promise are pressed into the consummated reality and utterly absent from the inaugurated reality. If however, we hold that this entails a regenerate community free of covenant-breakers, then this promise is inaugurated by way of the gathered eschatological community.[14] Returning then to Jeremiah, the New Covenant community is the solution to a central problem of previous communities established by God’s covenants. The unregenerate among the people of God cannot plague this community by inciting God’s curse; because the unregenerate are definitionally not party to the covenant. If they are not party to the covenant, then they are not part of the community and the community cannot be held responsible for their transgressions. That is quite different from the national people at the foot of Sinai who agreed to collectively follow God’s commands.

One clear instance of the interrelationship of the inaugurated reality with the consummated one is Matthew’s perfect future conjugation of “will have been bound” in Mat 16:19. Greg Allison calls this a proleptic eschatological forecast based upon a judgment of the church.[15] Michael Horton likewise admits that the reality of the future judgment is brought into the present through the act of excommunication.[16] The best explanation for this is that the local church is a present and real fulfillment of the aforementioned New Covenant promises - ruling and seated in the heavens in Christ while being His embassy on earth. God’s intention for His Kingdom – a people and a place under His rule - is now present on the earth due to the work of the Messianic King. Members in the covenant community and adherents to the promises of God given to that community are intentionally identical - while also having the authority to distinguish who is and is not of them.