The New Covenant - Guest Post by Bill Dumbrell

I am glad to include a guest post by Bill Dumbrell on "the New Covenant" which I hope will inform many of the work that Bill has done in the past in this subject and arouse the attention of others to the significance of "covenant" for biblical theology.

- MB

The New Covenant

The New Covenant of Luke 22:20 was Jesus' only significant interpretation of the purpose of his death, fulfilling by his resurrection the prophetic expectations of a revived Israel (cf. Ezek 36:25-27, Ezek 37:1-14 and Ezek 37:14-28 with John 3 and 4). In the construction of NT theology, we must give major weight to Jesus' action. Like the intersecting covenants of the OT (see my publications, 1984, 2002) we might expect the significance of the New Covenant to control the future of the revived Israel of Acts 2 (see my Romans 2005 and, published in Australia, Galatians and John).

The onset of the New Covenant meant the full implementation of God's undertaking to Noah (Gen 6:18) to maintain his covenanted purposes for the New Creation (Gen 1:26-28; Gen 2 - see Dumbrell 2002). I note that the use of heqim berit (Gen 6:18a) in the OT always points to maintenance, not commencement. Moreover, Gen 6:18b with 6:18a indicates that the salvation of Noah is that maintenance of purpose for creation. 'Covenant' from Gen 6:18a onwards becomes the language by which God's promise structure for history proceeds. That a divine intention to bring to a conclusion the work commenced with creation should be given the title of 'covenant' should not surprise. Biblical covenants are divine promises unilaterally imposed, firmly backed by covenant arrangement.

Jeremiah's New Covenant which Jesus' death and resurrection inaugurated, but not completely implemented until the Parousia, meant the dismissal of disobedient national Israel's election for service and the end of her institutions: law, temple, sacrificial atonement etc. Divine creational law (cf. the Decalogue), however, continues with a general obligation for all and to be written in the heart of believers (OT and NT). Jesus' New Covenant meant the onset of the New Creation age begun by the appointment of a New Israel (cf. John 20:22 correlated with John 1:12).

The New Covenant was thus the implementation of the Abrahamic Covenant of which the Sinai Covenant with Israel had been a subset. Paul's New Covenant ministry (2 Cor 3:6) that recognized all of this (cf. Rom 6:14, Gal 2:23, 2 Cor 3:6) confronted Jewish Christians (cf. 3:6 - note the present of 'kills') who saw Jesus as operating within the continuing Mosaic Covenant.

This was the problem facing Paul in Galatians, Romans and 2 Corinthians and we may see traces of it elsewhere in the Pauline Epistles. Paul's in his appraisal of Israel carefully recognized the changed position resulting from the cross (cf. Rom 2:1-3:20; 9:30-10:8; 7:1-6, 6:14, etc.).

The general reluctance of NT scholarship to accept a covenant emphasis, in view of Jesus' action and the Jewish character of the early church is puzzling. It is an undervaluing of how OT theology of kingdom and covenant works its way through the whole Bible. The usual objections of lack of reference to the terms, apply to the OT as well as to the new but the notion is basic to the correlation of the two Testaments/Covenants.

Bill Dumbrell on Biblical Theology

William Dumbrell (Th.D., Harvard University) has taught at Moore Theological College in Sydney, Australia, Regent College in Vancouver, the Presbyterian Theological Hall in Sydney, Macquarie University in Sydney, and Trinity Theological College in Singapore. He is the author of several works including Covenant and Creation, The Search for Order, The End of the Beginning, The Faith of Israel, The New Covenant: The Synoptics in Context, and Romans: A New Covenant Commentary (note the links are from a prominent Australian Christian bookseller called Koorong and prices are in Australian Dollars).

A central theme in Dumbrell's writings has been "covenant", especially the "new covenant". In a forthcoming article on Gen. 6.18 and Lk. 22.20, Dumbrell writes this:

"All this means that God's in-breaking salvation through Jesus, the cross and the resurrection, provides for eventual fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant (Luke 1:72-75), and in turn leads to the fulfilment of God's total purposes for creation, which was what the Sinai Covenant was designed to effect, and would have done so had Israel seen it as a way for her to have lived as God's people. W.Foerster [TDNT 7.990-01] notes that salvation, kingdom of God, messianic jubilee, and New Covenant, are overlapping descriptions with only slightly different nuances."

Bill Dumbrell's works have several distinct strengths:

1. He takes seriously the Old Testament background of the New Testament.

2. Covenant is one of the basic building blocks of God's relationship with Israel and it carries over in some way into the new covenant era.

3. In Paul's thought, the relationship between the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New Covenants was a central issue underpinning much of his exegesis of biblical texts and appearing in his argumentation against those who would try to proselytize his Gentile churches.

4. The correlation between the concepts of Kingdom and Covenant is helpful and accurate (Max Turner and Vincent Taylor say similar things on this point too).

At the same time, I often wonder if Dumbrell overplays the covenantal card at certain points. For instance in his reading of Gal. 2.15-21 (see his European Journal of Theology article and his Galatians commentary) I think he gives too much attention to justification as "covenant membership". I think justification is more comprehensive than this in Paul's thought and it has both horizontal and vertical elements. Secondly, the word "covenant" is very rare in the NT and when it does appear it is ordinarily in the context of discontinuity, e.g. 2 Corinthians 3 and Romans 9 (it pains me to say it, but that is one observation where the dispies are actually right!). Thirdly, I think it worthwhile to consider James Dunn's proposal that Paul has a theology of "promise" rather than a theology of "covenant" per se, esp. in Romans 9-11.

Otherwise, Bill Dumbrell has written two recent commentaries on Galatians and John which are worth knowing about and, if you like biblical theology, worth reading.

His volume, Galatians: A New Covenant Commentary is a precis of much of this thought on Paul and covenant. Here is one interesting quote: "The New Covenant in operation would permit the fulfilment of Israel's commission under the Sinai Covenant to implement the Abrahamic covenant in a way which was prevented by Israel's disobedience in the Old Testament. The New Covenant would facilitate a restored, obedient Israel, brought into being in Acts 2, to fulfil its commission imposed by virtue of its election as the people of God (Exod 19:5-6). That commission was for Israel a charge to be the light to the world, to bring about final world change and the full implementation of the kingdom of God. What the New Covenant would mean for an obedient restored Israel in the post-cross era, was world mission. We are no longer operating from Pentecost onwards in terms of Jerusalem as a world centre to which Gentiles will come in submision and obedience. The Promised Land is the now the world itself, now begun in Christian evidence to be seen as a type of the final antitype of the New Creation (p. vi)."

In another new book, John: Gospel Of The New Creation, Dumbrell gives what I would call a theological exegesis of the Fourth Gospel. He says this in the introduction: "John's is the Gospel of newness - new creation, new Israel, new covenant, new birth. It is a towering expression of Christian truth and expectation."

For those who are interested in reading Galatians and John through new covenant lenses, these volumes are quite illuminating, easy to read, and inexpensive.

My thanks to Bill Dumbrell for sending me copies!