Guide Questions about Predestination

Another question was raised to me. This time it's about "predestination". Actually, I am glad that someone is asking this kind of questions for it helps me locate my forgotten papers.

I wrote this paper in January 9, 2007 for a Reformed Theology seminar. I apologize that at this point, due to limitation, I could not provide the necessary references in this article. And you will also notice some missing space in tracing the Hebrew etymology of predestination. This is because I do not know of any specific keyboard command related to half or raised vowels.

---0---0---0--- 

In presenting the doctrine of predestination, this formulation recognizes the impossibility of collating all the Scripture passages related to the subject due to the limitation of the article. The best that the blogger can do is to offer a survey of this doctrine.

With this aim in mind, the writer would like to introduce the subject containing three major points: the etymology of the word, the development of the concept in biblical history, and the conclusion that predestination even though neglected in current day evangelicalism, remained to be a recognized biblical doctrine by those who adhere to the principles of Reformation.

Etymology

The word does not appear in Hebrew Old Testament for this language refuses to accept any compound words. However, there are numerous Hebrew words, which can be used to trace the origin of “predestination.” These words are related to the acts of “purposing, determining, and ordaining.” One important context to bear in mind in these action words is the “previousness” of the action. The Hebrew words are the following: yasar, ya‘as, ‘esah, mah savah, hasav, g zerah, hq, zamam, m zimmah, hafes, hefes, ha rs, hatakh, ho‘il, bahar, bahir, ya d‘, and hivdil.

The words related to predestination in the Greek New Testament are the following: prooridzo, protasso, protithemi, prothesis, proetoimadzo, problepo, proeidon, progiguosko, prognosis, procheeridzo, procheirotoneo, oridzo, boule, boulema, boulomai, thelema, thelo, eodokia, eodokeo, eklegesthai, eklektos, ekloge, and airomai. The two most important concepts from the study of Greek words related to predestination is the idea of “providential pre-arrangement” and “God’s sovereign choice of his people.” 

The history of the incorporation of the term in the English Bible underwent a complex process. The old English equivalent of “predestination” is “forestihtian.” The words “predestine” and “predestination” were of French origin, whereas “predestinate” was of Latin origin, “proedestino.” The noun form of the word has never had a place in the English Bible, but the verb appeared beginning from Tyndale to the Authorized Version. Two examples of variant translations are the Wycliffe, which used “before ordain,” while the Revised Version employed “foreordained.” One interesting observation at this point is that both the words “foreordination” and “predestination” are used synonymously. 

Development of the Concept in Biblical History

Beginning from the Old Testament background, we find the threefold foundations of predestination in the doctrine of an omnipotent and personal God, in an all-inclusive perfect plan of God called providence, and in religious consciousness and worldview of the Jews. Warfield in his study of the concept presented two aspects of predestination, which are cosmical and soteriological. Cosmical predestination is all about God’s plan, which is “broad enough to embrace the whole universe of things, minute enough to concern itself with the smallest details, and actualizing itself with inevitable certainty in every thing that comes to pass.” Soteriological predestination refers to the gracious, sovereign, discriminating electing love that He bestowed upon his chosen people. The two Hebrew words referring to this kind of love are yadah (know) and bahar (choose).

The tendency among the Jews during the period between the two testaments was leaning away from the Old Testament concept of predestination and opening the way for the assertion of human will. We find indications in the writings of the Jews during this time about the upholding of both total dependence on God and the importance of the human will. 

In the writings of Josephus, we find three varying schools of thought on predestination. The first one was represented by the Essenes, which was fatalistic in outlook. The second school was advocated by the Sadducees who denied the existence of fate and emphasized the role of the human will as the determiner of good and evil. And the last one, the Pharisees offered a mediating position that affirmed that some actions of men are result of fate, while others are product of the human will.

In the New Testament, Warfield started his study on predestination beginning with the concept of the Lord Jesus Christ himself. The view of the Lord is a continuation of the Old Testament view. The father’s will is seen as all-inclusive and all-powerful that leaves no room for a predestination that accommodates the foreseen actions of men or a decree that could be frustrated by men or an election that is determined by the human choice. In Warfield’s study of New Testament, he finds that the election of the elect is included “in the idea of the kingdom of God, in the idea of eternal life, in the idea of fellowship with Christ, and in the idea of participation in the glory, which the father has given his Son.” Even the choice of the elect and the overall development of their history are perceived to be the loving work of the Father. 

The early disciples followed after the footsteps of Jesus in upholding the doctrine of predestination even though not in the same expressions of terminology. James’ designation that “God is light” shows a highest conception of God’s perfection. In such a God, total dependence is given. In Acts, the grace of God is presented as the root cause of faith. Increase in the church is described as the product of God’s direct act. We also find there a philosophy of redemptive history where the realization of events in time is rooted in an eternal counsel. This definite purpose in human history is also evident in other historical books of the New Testament, which embraces both the largest event and even the minutest details in human existence. The apostle Peter, in his speech on the day of Pentecost ascribed the crucifixion to the counsel of God. His employment of the terms “foreknow” and “foreknowledge” Warfield asserts must be understood as a “loving, distinguishing regard, which assimilates them to the idea of election.” 

Among the New Testament witnesses, the epistles of Paul supplied the strongest bases for predestination. The apostle Paul held the same conviction as that of his predecessors regarding the interrelation between predestination and a high view of God. He also affirmed the correlation between the doctrine of election and the doctrine of God’s decree. He is even a predestinarian in the two senses of the word: cosmical and soteriological. Among numerous passages written by Paul, three stands out teaching clearly the doctrine of predestination: Romans 8:29-30; Romans Chapters 9-11; and Ephesians 1:1-12. The three chapters of Romans require long pages to exegete. It is sufficient for us to see that the first passage speaks about the universal government of God and the assured position of believers within the fatherly care of God. The Ephesian passage informs us about the blessings of those in Christ in the context of “the all-embracing decree of God that underlies total cosmical activity.” 

Predestination as a Biblical Doctrine

Let me conclude this presentation with a long quotation from Warfield concerning the sum of predestination. He said:

"The whole Bible doctrine of the decree revolves, in a word, around the simple idea of purpose. Since God is a Person, the very mark of his being is purpose. Since he is an infinite Person, His purpose is eternal and independent, all-inclusive and effective. Since he is a moral Person, His purpose is the perfect exposition of His infinite moral perfections. Since he is the personal Creator of all that exists, His purpose can find its final cause only in Himself."

Within the general backdrop of God’s decree mentioned above, the doctrine of election occupies a prominent position. Since both the doctrine of God’s decree and election are to be understood in connection with the lofty conception of God, it follows that election is characterized with absolute sovereignty of God, special providence, supreme act of grace, and particularity. Furthermore, the doctrine of election cannot escape but accept its corresponding doctrine, preterition, which teaches that “others are pass by and left without the gift of salvation.” 

Guide Questions

1. What are the three major points explained in the article about predestination?

2. What is the important context to bear in mind in tracing the Hebrew etymology of predestination related to the acts of "purposing, determining, and ordaining"?

3. How about in tracing its Greek etymology? What are the two most important concepts in studying the Greek words related to predestination?

4. For Dr. Benjamin B. Warfield, what are the two important aspects of predestination? Briefly explain each.

5. What was the tendency among the Jews during the period between the two testaments? What three diverse schools of thought on predestination do we find in the writings of Josephus?

6. Based on Dr. Warfield's study of the New Testament, how did he perceive the view of the Lord Jesus Christ concerning predestination? How did Dr. Warfield see the importance of the election of the elect in relation to other basic biblical teachings such as the kingdom of God and eternal life?

7. What's the idea of the early disciples about predestination? What was James' idea? Luke's? Peter's? and Paul's? What three important passages in the New Testament that contain the clear teaching of the apostle Paul about predestination?

8. State Dr. Warfield's summary of predestination.

9. What is the corresponding doctrine of election? Define it. 

Ang Pagtitiis ng mga Hinirang Hanggang sa Wakas

Kahapon ay may nagtanong sa akin kung ano ang pananaw ko ukol sa kaligtasan lalo na yong may kinalaman sa aral na "Once Saved, Always Saved" (OSAS). Natuwa ako sa katanungan at ito ay nagpaalala sa akin sa lesson na ginawa ko base sa Westminster Confession of Faith.

---0---0---0---

Ang araling ito ay tumutukoy sa pagtitiis ng mga hinirang hanggang sa wakas. Ilan sa mga kaisipan na ating sasaklawin sa araling ito ay may kinalaman sa buod ng katuruang ito, mga batayan ng pagtitiis, pasubali ng karanasan, at ang tunay na turo ng Biblia ukol sa “pagtalikod”.

Buod ng Katuruan

Ang mga tinawag at binabanal ng Diyos ay hindi maaaring ganap na mahulog palayo o tumalikod sa biyaya ng Diyos. Sa halip, sila ay tiyak na magtitiis hanggang sa wakas at maliligtas (Jeremias 32:40; Juan 3:36; 5:24; 10:28; Filipos 1:6; 1 Pedro 1:5; 1 Juan 2;19). 

Ang pagtitiis ng mga hinirang hanggang sa wakas ay hindi nangangahulugan na ang kaligtasan ay tiyak dulot ng “minsan” kundi ng “tunay” na pagsampalataya. Hindi nito itinuturo na hindi na kinakailangang magsikap. Sa halip, ang pagsisikap ay patunay na “ang Diyos ang nagbibigay ng pagnanasa at kakayanang maisagawa ang kaniyang kalooban” (Filipos 2:13). 

Ang pagtitiis ng mga hinirang ay nagpapakita na ang tunay na larawan ng buhay Cristiano ay hindi isang “palaruan” kundi isang “digmaan”. Isang pandaraya ng kaaway na isipin na ang buhay ay magiging simple at madali sa oras na ang isang tao ay magbalik-loob sa Diyos lalot higit sa pagharap sa mga suliranin at pagsubok ng buhay. Ang buhay Cristiano ay isang digmaan sa pasimula hanggang sa huli. (Mga Awit 38:9, 10, 12, 16, 17; Mateo 24:13). 

Batayan ng Pagtitiis

Ang pagtitiis ng mga hinirang ay nakabatay sa mga sumusunod:

• Sa plano ng Diyos para sa mga hinirang udyok ng hindi nagbabagong pag-ibig ng Diyos

• Sa bisa ng katuwiran at pamamagitan ni Jesus

• Sa pananatili ng Espiritu at ng binhi ng Diyos, at

• Sa pagtustos na laan sa tipan ng biyaya

Pasubali ng Karanasan

Subalit, para bagang pinasusubalian ng ating karanasan ang aral na ito ng Banal na Kasulatan. Dito masusubok natin kung ano ang mas higit na matimbang sa ating paniniwala. Ang atin bang paniniwala ay nakasalig sa karanasan o sa Banal na Kasulatan?

Itinuturo ng 1 Juan 2:19 na maaaring magkaroon ng tinatawag na huwad na pananampalataya o paglilingkod. Ang ganap na paglisan ng mga dating nagsipaglingkod ay tiyak na palatandaan na sila ay nagkaroon lamang ng anyo ng pananampalataya at hindi kabilang sa mga hinirang.

Uri ng “Pagtalikod” na Itinuturo ng Biblia

Ang uri ng “pagtalikod” sa pananampalataya na itinuturo ng Biblia ay ang pagkahulog ng mga mananampalataya sa isang kalunus-lunos na kasalanan at sa loob ng ilang panahon ay maaaring manatili sila sa ganiitong kalagayan. Ang katuruang ito ay hindi kumukunsiti upang magkasala. Sa halip, ito ay nagsisilbing seryosong babala laban sa “pakikipaglaro” sa kasalanan. Layunin ng aral na ito na alisin ang huwad na kaseguruhan.

Ang pagkahulog ng mga hinirang sa kalunus-lunos na kasalanan ay bunga ng mga sumusunod:

• Tukso ng Diablo at ng sanlibutan (1 Juan 2:15; Marcos 1:13; Mateo 26: 70, 72, 74).

• Pananatili ng kabulukan sa ating mga laman (Santiago 1:13-14), at

• Pagpapabaya sa paggamit ng mga kasangkapan upang mapangalagaan ang ating mga sarili (Hebreo 10: 24-25). 

Ang pagkahulog sa kasalanan ng isang mananampalataya ay magbubunga nga mga sumusunod:

• Pagdalamhati sa Diyos (2 Samuel 11:27).

• Paglapastangan sa Diyos (2 Samuel 12:14)

• Pagkawala ng katiyakan at kaaliwan (Awit 51:8,10,12)

• Pagtigas ng puso at sugat sa budhi (Awit 32:3-4).

• Sakit ng damdamin sa kapwa, at

• Hatol sa sarili

Bunga ng kaseryosohan ng aral, hindi ito maaaring gamitin para sa huwad na katiyakan ng kaligtasan. Ang pagwawalang bahala sa seryosong babalang ito ay maaaring magdulot ng matinding dalamhati hindi lamang sa Diyos kundi sa mananampalataya mismo, sa kaniyang mga mahal sa buhay, mga kaibigan, at mga kakilala. Ito ay maaaring magdulot ng malaking kahihiyan. Ang tamang tugon sa aral na ito ay maglalayo sa isang mananampalataya sa hindi kinakailangang pagdadalamhati at sa halip ay buhay na tiwasay at payapa. Sa bandang huli, ang tamang pagkaunawa sa aral na ito ay nagbibigay ng katiyakan na ang Diyos ang may hawak ng ating kaligtasan. 

Mga Gabay na Katanungan

1. Ang "minsan" bang pagsampalataya ay garantiya ng katiyakan ng kaligtasan? Inaalis ba nito ang pangangailangan ng pagsisikap na maisagawa ang kalooban ng Diyos?

2. Tama bang isipin na tapos na ang lahat ng mga suliranin ng isang taong nagbalik-loob sa Diyos? Ipaliwanag.

3. Saan nakabatay ang katiyakan na ang mga tunay na mananampalataya ay magtitiis hanggang wakas? Paano mo ipaliliwanag ang pasubali ng karanasan na hindi lahat ng "nagsisampalataya" ay nagtitiis hanggang wakas?

4. Ayon sa Banal na Kasulatan, anu-ano ang mga sanhi ng "pagtalikod" o pagkahulog ng mga mananampalataya sa isang kalunus-lunos na kasalanan?

5. Anu-ano ang mga resulta ng pagkahulog sa kasalanan ng isang mananampalataya? 

The Covenant of Works by Dr. J. Faber Guide Questions

All these years I thought the covenant of works is an established doctrine within Reformed theology. However, as I study the subject, I just recently realized that the Reformed community is actually divided about the subject. Many have been challenging the biblicality of this doctrine. Read Dr. J. Faber's article and see a glimpse of this controversy. 

For those who will spend time to read Dr. Faber's article, I prepared six questions to assist in navigating its content:

1. Based on the Clarion quotation, what was the charge against Prof. Norman Shepherd? 

2. Briefly explain the theological basis of those who oppose the position of Dr. Shepherd.

3. According to Dr. Shepherd's critics, in what way did he reduce the contrast between the two covenants?

4. According to Dr. J. Faber, what is the position of Rev. C. Vonk in this controversy?

5. What is the position of Dr. J. Faber in this contention? 

6. Are you in favor of Prof. Shepherd's position as presented by Dr. J. Faber? How about Dr. J. Faber's position? Why? 

Covenant and the Unity of Scripture Guide Questions

In Covenant and the Unity of Scripture, John M. Frame described how Reformed theologians have used the covenant motif to demonstrate the unity of the Bible. It is interesting how Dr. Frame summarized the entire Bible in just seven sentences using this motif. And then he introduced Meredith G. Kline's thesis about covenantal elements, claimed that Kline found the origin of covenantal model of canonicity, elaborated its helpfulness, and provided three arguments to prove how those elements show the unity of the Bible. 

Here is John Frame's covenantal summary of the Bible:

"On this understanding, the whole Bible, diverse in content as it may appear at first sight, can be seen as a story of God making covenants and man responding to them. The books of law show what God expects of his covenant people. The books of history indicate man’s actual response. The Psalms contain the praise, the laments, the questionings, the blessings and cursings which should be on the lips of a covenant people. The wisdom books contain applications of the covenant law to human problems. The prophets bring God’s covenant lawsuit against the covenant breakers while at the same time promising covenant renewal. The Gospels and Acts present the history of the New Covenant, which is applied to believers and to world history in the epistles and Revelation."

You can find the entire article here:

After reading, you can use these questions to guide you to have an overview of the article:

1. Explain the way Reformed theologians have used the covenant motif to demonstrate the unity of the Bible. Briefly explain the two major covenants.

2. State Dr. Frame's summary of the whole Bible using the covenant as the unifying motif. 

3. Enumerate the elements of the covenant based on the thesis of Dr. Meredith G. Kline and briefly explain each of them.

4. Elaborate how Dr. Kline's covenantal idea of the Decalogue and the Book of Deuteronomy serves as the origin of the covenantal model of canonicity.

5. Clarify the usefulness of Dr. Kline's thesis in seeing the unity of the Bible.

6. Finally, what are the three arguments used by Dr. Frame to show that Dr. Kline's covenantal elements prove the unity of the Bible? Concisely explain each of them. 

Reformed Theology is Covenant Theology Guide Questions

1. Why is it that the terms "Reformed" and "covenant" are commonly used together? 

2. Can you cite historical documents that illustrate the above connection?

3. Can you explain further what does the Westminster Confession of Faith primarily teach about covenant theology?

4. What is the connection between biblical covenants and the kingdom of God?

5. Elaborate how God used the covenants at different stages of God's kingdom in biblical history from the time of Adam until the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

6. What three issues cause most evangelicals to find covenant theology difficult to accept as a unifying theme of the Bible? Explain how covenant theology resolves these issues. 

7. Why is there a need for covenant theology to be reaffirmed even among Reformed churches? Explain the negative consequences of neglecting covenant theology in relation to the three mentioned issues as they appear among Reformed churches.

Reformed Theology Is Covenant Theology by Richard Pratt Jr.

"". . . the families of believers are covenant communities within which God's mercy is passed from one generation to another.""

Reformed Theology is often associated with “covenant theology.” If you listen carefully, you’ll often hear pastors and teachers describe themselves as “Reformed and covenantal.” The terms Reformed and covenant are used together so widely that it behooves us to understand why they are connected.

Covenant theology refers to one of the basic beliefs that Calvinists have held about the Bible. All Protestants who have remained faithful to their heritage affirm sola Scriptura, the belief that the Bible is our supreme and unquestionable authority. Covenant theology, however, distinguishes the Reformed view of Scripture from other Protestant outlooks by emphasizing that divine covenants unify the teachings of the entire Bible.

Earlier developments in the Reformed, covenantal understanding of Scripture reached a high point in seventeenth-century England with the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), the Savoy Declaration (1658), the London Baptist Confession of 1689, and each representing different groups of English-speaking Calvinists. With only slight variations among them, these documents each devote an entire chapter to the way God’s covenants with humanity reveal the unity of all that the Bible teaches.

For example, the Westminster Confession of Faith speaks of God condescending to reveal Himself to humanity by means of covenant. It then divides the entire history of the Bible into just two covenants: the “covenant of works” in Adam and the “covenant of grace” in Christ. The covenant of works was God’s arrangement with Adam and Eve before their fall into sin. The covenant of grace governed the rest of the Bible. In this view, all stages of the covenant of grace were the same in substance. They differed only as God administered His one covenant of grace in Christ in various ways throughout biblical history.

Along these same lines, a number of more recent Reformed theologians have affirmed the covenantal unity of Scripture by relating particular biblical covenants to what the New Testament calls “the kingdom of God.” Jesus indicated the importance of God’s kingdom in the opening words of the Lord’s Prayer: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:9–10). Jesus’ words first indicate that the foremost goal of history is the glory and honor of God Himself. Yet, His words also indicate that God will receive this glory through the coming of His kingdom to earth as it is in heaven. God’s goal has always been to receive the eternal praise of every creature by establishing His glorious kingdom on earth. To borrow from the well-known praise of Revelation 11:15, at the end of history “the kingdom of the world [will] become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”

Recent archaeological discoveries have shown how God’s covenants related to His earthly kingdom. In the days of the Bible, many kings of nations surrounding Israel administered the expansion of their kingdoms through international treaties. Biblical scholars have noticed remarkable parallels between these ancient treaties and the biblical covenants with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and Christ. These similarities indicate that the Scriptures present covenants as God’s way of administrating the expansion of His kingdom on earth.

Biblical covenants emphasized what was needed at specific stages of God’s kingdom by furthering the principles of previous covenants. God started with Adam to reveal His own kingship, the role of humanity, and the destiny He had planned for the earth (Gen. 1–3). These principles were then carried forward as God promised stability in nature for humanity’s service in Noah’s covenant (Gen. 6, 9). God enhanced His previous covenants by promising that Abraham’s descendants would become a great empire and spread God’s blessings to all other nations (Gen. 15, 17). God built on these covenants by blessing Israel with His law in the days of Moses (Ex. 19–24). Every previous covenant was taken to new heights as God established David’s dynasty and promised that one of his sons would rule in righteousness over Israel and over the entire world (Pss. 72; 89; 132). All Old Testament covenants were then furthered and fulfilled in Christ (Jer. 31:31; 2Cor. 1:19–20). As the great son of David, His life, death, resurrection, ascension, and return eternally secure the transformation of the entire earth into God’s glorious kingdom.

Many evangelical Christians today find it difficult to believe that everything in Scripture after Genesis 3:15 concerns God’s kingdom administered through the unfolding of one covenant of grace. The majority of American evangelicals view Scripture as divided into periods of time governed by substantially different theological principles. When Christians follow this popular approach to Scripture, it is not long before they become convinced that the new covenant of our day is actually at odds with many aspects of the Old Testament.

At least three issues often move to the foreground: works and grace, corporate and individual faith, and earthly and spiritual concerns. First, many evangelicals believe that the Old Testament’s emphasis on good works is incompatible with salvation by grace through faith in Christ. Second, Israel’s corporate relationship with God as a community appears to have been replaced by a focus on the individuals’ personal relationships with God. Third, many evangelicals believe that the Old Testament call to establish an earthly kingdom for God stands in contrast with the New Testament emphasis on a spiritual kingdom in Christ.

Covenant theology has enabled Reformed theologians to see that the New Testament is actually quite similar to the Old Testament in these three areas. First, in this view salvation by grace through faith in Christ was the only way of salvation in both Testaments. The entire Bible calls for good works because saving faith always yields the fruit of obedience to God. Second, covenant theology helps us see that both Testaments speak about individual and corporate relationships with God. All of God’s covenants deal with people on both levels. Third, covenant theolog y has shown that God’s kingdom has always been earthly and spiritual. The Old and New Testaments focus on our service in both realms. In these and other ways, covenant theology has much to offer the broader evangelical community.

At the same time, there is also a growing need for covenant theology to be strongly reaffirmed in contemporary Reformed circles. In recent decades, many newer advocates of Reformed theology have neglected covenant theology.

More and more, we find that Reformed theology has been reduced to what we often call the doctrines of grace — familiar beliefs such as total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints. Of course, we should value these truths of Scripture, but when we fail to stress the larger framework that covenant theology provides, our understanding of the Bible soon begins to suffer in the same three areas.

First, the doctrines of grace without covenant theology have led some to believe that Reformed theology is primarily concerned to teach that God’s grace sustains the Christian life from beginning to end. Of course, this is certainly true. Yet, the covenants of both testaments consistently teach that God has always required determined effort from His people in response to His grace and that He will reward obedience and punish disobedience.

Second, apart from covenant theology, many people in our circles seem to think that our theology is all about finding uniquely Reformed ways for individuals to improve their relationships with God. In our day, a number of paths toward personal holiness and devotion have been treated as the central features of Reformed theology. As important as individuals are in the Bible, covenant theology highlights our corporate relationship with God as well. No biblical covenant was made with just one person. They also involved God establishing relationships with groups of people. For this reason, both testaments teach us that the families of believers are covenant communities within which God’s mercy is passed from one generation to another. Moreover, the visible church in both testaments is the covenant community within which we receive the gospel and the ordinary means of grace.

Third, the doctrines of grace easily give us the impression that Reformed theology is only concerned with spiritual matters. Many people in our circles are deeply concerned with inward transformation by a true understanding of Scripture. Yet, we often neglect the physical and social effects of sin and salvation. Covenant theology gives us a far larger and more compelling vision of our hopes as Christians. In both testaments, believers extend God’s kingdom both to spiritual and earthly realms. We are to teach the gospel of Christ to all nations so that people may be transformed spiritually, but this spiritual renewal is for the sake of extending the lordship of Christ to every facet of culture around the world.

All of this is to say that covenant theology has much to offer every Christian. So when we ask ourselves, “What is Reformed theology?” it will serve us well to respond, “Reformed theology is covenant theology.”

Source: Reformed Theology is Covenant Theology