Studying The Covenants

I am studying the the minor prophets and realize the importance of understanding the covenants. Can you recommend Logos resources to aid me in studying and understanding the covenants? Do you have any resources that speak specifically about the covenants - both the old testament covenants and the new covenant? What do you appreciate about them?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

Covenants are included in The Bible introduction => http://www.logos.com/product/6645/complete-jewish-bible

Keep Smiling [:)]

David Paul

I'm not sure there are any resources in Logos that will give you a wholly accurate understanding of the covenants. Stern's summation above is better than most, I suppose, but is flawed nonetheless. All I can say here is that you should read all that you can, and withhold settling on a clear and certain definition for the time being. The worst thing anyone can do, and it happens all the time, is assume they have "settled the matter" when they simply have not. It becomes extremely hard for someone to "unsettle" a matter of understanding--first, because people take their settled understandings very personally, and second, because experiencing "unsettling" gives folks the impression that the world as they know it is coming apart. Faced with that kind of experience, most people panic and simply freeze in place...which is dangerous and potentially deadly.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479234#Comment_479234

I'm not sure there are any resources in Logos that will give you a wholly accurate understanding of the covenants. Stern's summation above is better than most, I suppose, but is flawed nonetheless. All I can say here is that you should read all that you can, and withhold settling on a clear and certain definition for the time being. The worst thing anyone can do, and it happens all the time, is assume they have "settled the matter" when they simply have not. It becomes extremely hard for someone to "unsettle" a matter of understanding--first, because people take their settled understandings very personally, and second, because experiencing "unsettling" gives folks the impression that the world as they know it is coming apart. Faced with that kind of experience, most people panic and simply freeze in place...which is dangerous and potentially deadly.

David, you give sage advice here to be careful about speaking dogmatically about anything we don't fully understand. In our eagerness to know the truth we can easily jump to conclusions about matters because it is much more comfortable for us to be able to pigeon-hole that portion of truth in our minds rather than to say "I don't think I have a conclusion yet" or "I'm not sure". At the same time there are truths that we believe after careful study upon which we can "hang our hat". Scripture was meant to reveal truth while at the same time withholding mystery.

With regard to the way you began your post I would also caution you not to just say that Stern's summary is flawed without at least saying how it may be flawed and perhaps proposing what you currently believe are some of your conclusions. I too am not aware of resources in Logos that have a good discussion on this matter because I simply have not read them yet but I would imagine that there are some excellent ones that discuss this fully.

Jim Wait

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479277#Comment_479277

N T Wright's The New Testament and people of God is an excellent source for studying the covenants.

Evan Boardman

I am studying the the minor prophets and realize the importance of understanding the covenants. Can you recommend Logos resources to aid me in studying and understanding the covenants? Do you have any resources that speak specifically about the covenants - both the old testament covenants and the new covenant? What do you appreciate about them?

An Exposition Of Hebrews 8:6-13

Wherein, The nature and difference between the Old and New Covenants is discovered.

By John Owen.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479277#Comment_479277

With regard to the way you began your post I would also caution you not to just say that Stern's summary is flawed without at least saying how it may be flawed and perhaps proposing what you currently believe are some of your conclusions. I too am not aware of resources in Logos that have a good discussion on this matter because I simply have not read them yet but I would imagine that there are some excellent ones that discuss this fully.

I accept your assessment, Bruce. It would be "better" for me to give some tangibles about "why" I say his summary is flawed. I just don't feel like I can at this point. My understanding of the covenants isn't exactly kosher or orthodox, and it is just too big an issue to broach on the forum. I can understand why someone would say "if you can't back it up, don't say it"...and I recognize the logic of that...except, I'm not trying to prove my perspective correct at this juncture. The time for that will come, eventually. But this is a critical subject, and so I do feel that it is worthwhile to, at minimum, float the perspective that says the subject is still not fully settled--even if people generally think it is. I will say this--it is impossible to ever arrive at a proper understanding of the covenants if your starting point is the "new covenant". Unlike Homer's epics, the Bible is not written and presented "in medias res" (i.e. starting in the middle). Attempting to develop a Biblically coherent understanding of the covenants by starting with the New Testament is fatally flawed. It is IMPOSSIBLE to reverse engineer the correct understanding. Of course, that statement bucks a trend that may not be universal, but nearly is. My contention is that there is a direct correspondence between the "many" of Mt. 7:13, 14 and the "many" who begin their understanding of the Bible by starting with (to take the most common example) the Gospel of John.

Fortunately, if someone wanted to tease out the possibility of the above assertion, the powerhouse that is Logos is one of the best possible tools to help in that endeavor.

Also, if someone wants to dismiss everything I just said, nothing prevents them from doing so.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479988#Comment_479988

With regard to the way you began your post I would also caution you not to just say that Stern's summary is flawed without at least saying how it may be flawed and perhaps proposing what you currently believe are some of your conclusions. I too am not aware of resources in Logos that have a good discussion on this matter because I simply have not read them yet but I would imagine that there are some excellent ones that discuss this fully.

I accept your assessment, Bruce. It would be "better" for me to give some tangibles about "why" I say his summary is flawed. I just don't feel like I can at this point. My understanding of the covenants isn't exactly kosher or orthodox, and it is just too big an issue to broach on the forum. I can understand why someone would say "if you can't back it up, don't say it"...and I recognize the logic of that...except, I'm not trying to prove my perspective correct at this juncture. The time for that will come, eventually. But this is a critical subject, and so I do feel that it is worthwhile to, at minimum, float the perspective that says the subject is still not fully settled--even if people generally think it is. I will say this--it is impossible to ever arrive at a proper understanding of the covenants if your starting point is the "new covenant". Unlike Homer's epics, the Bible is not written and presented "in medias res" (i.e. starting in the middle). Attempting to develop a Biblically coherent understanding of the covenants by starting with the New Testament is fatally flawed. It is IMPOSSIBLE to reverse engineer the correct understanding. Of course, that statement bucks a trend that may not be universal, but nearly is. My contention is that there is a direct correspondence between the "many" of Mt. 7:13, 14 and the "many" who begin their understanding of the Bible by starting with (to take the most common example) the Gospel of John.

Fortunately, if someone wanted to tease out the possibility of the above assertion, the powerhouse that is Logos is one of the best possible tools to help in that endeavor.

Also, if someone wants to dismiss everything I just said, nothing prevents them from doing so.

Thanks David for taking time to explain yourself more. I was wondering if you were going to do so and I appreciate your effort. I also agree with your assessment that one must not begin at the New Covenant to understand the covenants as that would be a far too simplistic approach. As you take time to develop your perspectives I hope that you share your results here including using Logos resources. Maybe even a Faithlife Group would be in order to better facilitate things.

Evan Boardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479991#Comment_479991

I also agree with your assessment that one must not begin at the New Covenant to understand the covenants as that would be a far too simplistic approach.

Would you understand anything in the Old without the New revealing it? If so Hebrews and many other book need not be written.

Rosie Perera

The book I found best at explaining the covenants is The Christ of the Covenants by O. Palmer Robertson, which unfortunately Logos doesn't carry (yet?). Here is the Table of Contents.

Bruce Waltke's An Old Testament Theology (which Logos does have) is excellent and has chapters on each of The Noahic Covenant, The Abrahamic Covenant, The Old Covenant (Mosaic), and The Davidic Covenant; which is not all of the covenants that Robertson covers.

Evan Boardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480003#Comment_480003

The book I found best at explaining the covenants is The Christ of the Covenants by O. Palmer Robertson, which unfortunately Logos doesn't carry (yet?). Here is the Table of Contents.

Bruce Waltke's An Old Testament Theology (which Logos does have) is excellent and has chapters on each of The Noahic Covenant, The Abrahamic Covenant, The Old Covenant (Mosaic), and The Davidic Covenant; which is not all of the covenants that Robertson covers.

Pink has one also. And The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man by Herman Witsius has been the go to for years.. But Owen's is still the best if you ask me. [:)]

Evan Boardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480008#Comment_480008

But Owen's is still the best if you ask me.

In Logo's that is.Printed is Nehemiah Coxe's

Alan Charles Gielczyk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480009#Comment_480009

Introducing Covenant Theology by Michael Horton is an excellent book. It is only available in this collection though.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479999#Comment_479999

I also agree with your assessment that one must not begin at the New Covenant to understand the covenants as that would be a far too simplistic approach.

Would you understand anything in the Old without the New revealing it? If so Hebrews and many other book need not be written.

I would just advocate for a full understanding of all the covenants to fully grasp any of them.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/479999#Comment_479999

Would you understand anything in the Old without the New revealing it?

Certainly and Of Course.

If so Hebrews and many other book need not be written.

That is just as untrue as this is...1 Cor. 14:33

Evan Boardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480060#Comment_480060

That just a untrue as this is...1 Cor. 14:33

Does God being a God not of confusion but of peace, mean we dont need His word or yet His Spirit to understand His word?

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480078#Comment_480078

That is just as untrue as this is...1 Cor. 14:33

Does God being a God not of confusion but of peace, mean we dont need His word or yet His Spirit to understand His word?

His Word is Spirit...and so you must understand His Word by His Word. Since you didn't seem to quite understand what I meant by my statement above (I'm sure the misspellings, which I corrected, didn't help--I was tired and needed a nap [:P]), so I will speak clearly:

YHWH IS an author of confusion. Gen. 11:7

Tanakh is not wholly incomprehensible, though it was written in parts so that understanding would be sealed. But there is a key to understanding...

Psa. 111:10

Sleiman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480146#Comment_480146

To add to what have been suggested, an extremely interesting study (personal opinion) is:

Kinship by Covenant: A Canonical Approach to the Fulfillment of God's Saving Promises by Scott Hahn

it's only available it seems as part os a collection such as the Anchor Yale reference library or a catholic resources bundle (pls don't let this scare you away, it is really a good study)

description and sample pages here: http://www.logos.com/product/5734/anchor-yale-bible-reference-library#027

Dan Starcevich

Hi Michael,

I am also in a study of the prophets and I too am finding out how important the biblical, eternal covenants are in understanding their message. In fact, I took an "operational pause" and did an exegetical study of the Abrahamic (Gn 12:1--3, cf 6-7; 13:14-17; 15:1-21; 17:1-14; 22:15-18), Palestinian (Dt. 30:1-10), Davidic (2 Sa 7:12-16), and New covenants (Jer 31:31-34). So I would recommend any exegetical, evangelical commentaries on those passages. ISBE has a good general introduction of treaties and law codes in general to help you understand what these were in their cultural and historical context. I also found to be helpful Ryrie's explanation of the covenants and their importance in "The Basis of Premillenial Faith" (on March Madness special right now).

Enjoy your study and may God bless it!

Stephen Paynter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/480009#Comment_480009

But Owen's is still the best if you ask me.

In Logo's that is.Printed is Nehemiah Coxe's

Yes, by any standards, Nehemiah Coxe's book on Covenant Theology (of a Particular or "Reformed" Baptist) variety is both a good book, and an important treatment of one of the major versions of covenant theology. I would love to see "Covenant Theology: From Adam to Christ" (Reformed Baptist Academic Press) in Logos, for as well as Coxe's book, it also contains the pertinent bit of John Owen's treatment of covenant theology from his Hebrews commentary ... which is too big and too expensive for a lot of us to have in Logos.

However, personally I found Coxe's book a little confusing - not because of any problem with his work, but because like all books which take an exegetical approach to a topic like "covenant theology" one is not always sure of the importance of each exegetical conclusion, and the impact that it has on the overall position being defended.

A really helpful companion to read alongside Coxe's book, is a new one by Pascal Denault, "The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology: A Comparison Between 17th century Particular Baptist and Paedobaptist Federalism", Solid Ground Christian Books, 2013. This is another book that should be in Logos. See my recent review at amazon.co.uk or amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1VTC5KBU04FWM/ref=cm_cr_pr_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview. The advantage of Denault's book is that the Baptist and Paedobaptist arguments are contrasted, so that one can understand the ramifications of adopting one or other of the interpretative stances.

For those interested in contemporary Baptist reflections on covenant theology that do not totally fall into the historic "Reformed" tradition, there is the New Covenant Theology camp, of which by far the best book so far is Gantry and Wellum's "Kingdom through Covenant". Another book I'd love to see in Logos.