Renihan, Samuel. The Mystery of Christ: His Covenant and His Kingdom. Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2019.

Introduction

Samuel Renihan wrote The Mystery of Christ: His Covenant and His Kingdom. He holds a Master of Divinity from Westminster Seminary California and a Doctor of Philosophy from the Free University of Amsterdam. He serves as pastor of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church in La Mirada, California. Before writing The Mystery of Christ, he wrote and published his dissertation From Shadows to Substance: The Federal Theology of the English Particular Baptist (1642-1704). Thus, he has the expertise to do what he has set out to do in The Mystery of Christ. His goal is stated in the preface: “This book seeks to develop and present the covenant theology of the Bible through a thorough study of the Scriptures” (7).

Summary

Part one deals with Renihan’s method and hermeneutics as he engages and explicates this subject. The subject of covenant theology is informed by two theological disciplines: Biblical and Systematic. Renihan puts forward four foundations approaching covenant theology. One, the scope of the subject, namely covering the whole of the Bible, makes oversimplification a real danger. Thus, “a theological system deriving from covenant theology must be built from the ground up, giving full and due weight to the trees that constitute that forest” (13). Two, the distinction between creation and covenant must be understood. Creation is natural. It is a natural obligation for man to obey God. It is supernatural for God to give blessings to man as a result of that obedience. Covenants are supernatural, giving what is not owed and expecting what is beyond nature. Therefore, each covenant must be examined to determine its details and conditions (15). Three, the concepts of law and the gospel must be understood. “The law and the gospel are two opposite paths to a righteous standing before God: a perfect record of personal obedience, or a perfect record obedience of imputed obedience” (20). Four, the nature of redemptive history and the mystery must be understood. “A mystery, as expressed by Paul, is not something intentionally hidden so as not to be found or understood, but rather something revealed partially, something made known incompletely. Mystery is not a means of concealing but revealing” (22).

Typology is one of the modes through which the mystery of Christ is revealed. Typology is generally agreed upon as an analogous relationship of persons, places, or institutions ordained by God with an element of escalation between type and antitype (28). As such, “The New Testament contains the fulfillment of previous patterns in a greater and final way. Conversely, the Old testament establishes patterns that find their fulfillment in the New Testament” (28-29). The areas of disagreement arise when deciding on the relationship between type and antitype. According to Renihan, first, types reveal something greater and different than themselves. Second, they function at two levels: their immediate context and their messianic context. Third, types end in their antitypes. Fourth, they are both positive and negative.

Next, Renihan exposits the subjects of covenant and kingdom. Quoting Nehemiah Coxe, Renihan agrees that a covenant is “A declaration of [God’s] sovereign pleasure concerning the benefits he will bestow on [man], the communion they will have with him, and the way and means by which this will be enjoyed by them” (41). Covenants have sanctions, which are “threats that enforce and ensures the fulfillment of the covenant commitments” (41). Covenants also have both matter and form. The matter is the specific commitments of those within the covenant, while the form is established when both parties ratify the covenant (46). There are two types of covenants found in Scripture: covenants of works and covenants of grace. With a “covenant of works, when obedience has been rendered, blessings promised are enjoyed. Conversely, in a covenant of grace, after promises have been received, laws are introduced” (48). The only difference is the basis by which blessings are enjoyed. Another critical component of Divine covenants is federal headship. A federal head represents a specific group of people (50). Each covenant has a federal head (50). The final aspect of a covenant that Renihan points out is a covenant’s function. He writes, “Covenants function as the legal basis upon which God interacts with man in a given kingdom. Covenants establish the boundaries of a kingdom, appoint federal heads, grant promises, impose laws, and define the offspring of the federal head, and specify all other pertinent and necessary details of how God will exercise His dominion through the federal head and his offspring” (54).

The first kingdom Renihan deals with is the kingdom of Creation. This kingdom is governed by two covenants: The Covenant of Works and the Noahic Covenant. The Covenant of Works is the covenant that God made with Adam after his creation and placement in the Garden of Eden. Adam is the federal head of all his physical seed. Perfect obedience to the laws of nature and the positive law of not partaking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (63). Eternal life was promised if he obeyed God’s Law perfectly. This is signified in the Tree of life (66). God threatened Adam and his physical seed with death for disobedience (69). Adam was tested by the Satan, if victorious in obeying God’s positive command to not take of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then Adam would go on to bring creation to a consummation by extending Eden to the ends of the earth and filling it with righteous offspring (70-71). Adam, however, failed to obey all of creation, and his offspring came under the curse of the covenant. In Adam, mankind died spiritually, meaning they were condemned and corrupted and began to die physically (72-73). The Covenant of Works has been breached and is no longer a way to eternal life (74). Despite Adam’s disobedience, God makes a promise amid the curses rendered to the serpent, namely a seed who would overcome the serpent (76).

In the wake of the Fall, man multiplied and filled the earth. With the growth of the population came a growth of man’s sin. God sent a flood and wiped out mankind, but saved eight people. With the head of that household, who is Noah, God made another covenant. The Noahic Covenant is a covenant of grace that regulates the cursed kingdom of creation (83). God will not destroy the earth with a flood, and man is to multiply and refill the earth. This covenant ensures the fulfillment of the promise of the seed of the women mentioned above (80-81).

In part three, Renihan presents a third kingdom within the fallen but the regulated kingdom of Creation that serves to bring forth that promised seed, limiting Him to a specific nation, then a tribe within that nation, and then a household within that tribe (86). The covenants that are made in establishing and governing this kingdom are the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic. The promises to the nation are made in the Abrahamic. The laws and regulations to receive and remain within the blessings of this kingdom are first found in the Abrahamic Covenant and then expanded in the Mosaic Covenant. The federal head of the people of Israel is found in Davidic Covenant.

The Abrahamic Covenant is made with Abraham and his physical offspring in him (88). The promised blessings to him and his physical seed include inheritance of the land of Canaan and blessing for the nations (88). The covenant is expanded to include the promise of royalty and demand for covenant loyalty (91). The promise is made to Abraham and his physical seed but only enjoyed personally by those who obey the covenant demands, particularly the positive law circumcision and the moral law (93). This covenant is fulfilled in the conquest of Canaan (94). It is the foundation for and anticipates all the covenants made with Israel (96-98). In the Mosaic Covenant, it is expanded, and the promise of disinheritance for disobedience is reestablished (98). In the Davidic Covenant, the promise of royalty is fulfilled (99). It also anticipates the New Covenant in that it contains the promise for the Messiah through whom all the nations would be blessed (99).

The Mosaic Covenant is founded upon the Abrahamic Covenant. It is made specifically with the offspring of Isaac and Jacob after him. It is made after the prophesied oppression by, and liberation from Egypt takes place (102-103). It is a covenant of works. When the laws are obeyed, the conquest and continuance of Canaan will continue. When its laws are disobeyed, the disinheritance of the land of Canaan will follow (105). It established an actual national kingdom out of nomads (108). The covenant did nothing to change the hearts of those involved in it. It did not remedy the corruption or condemnation of those born in Adam. However, it did provide a way for the sins of Israel to be forgiven that they may remain in the land of Canaan. The sacrificial system could not secure eternal forgiveness but temporal forgiveness for life in Canaan (115). “The Abrahamic Covenant established the kingdom of Israel and lays out basic obligations. The Mosaic Covenant expanded and implemented covenantal government over the kingdom as it arose and flourished in Canaan” (122). The Mosaic Covenant furthered the mystery of Christ by typologically showing His priesthood (122).

The Davidic Covenant builds upon the foundations laid in the promise to the serpent, Abrahamic Covenant, and Mosaic Covenant (123). Royalty was promised to Abraham. A law for kings was made within the law of Moses. The necessity of a king was shown in the book of judges (124). The first king was chosen by the people. The second was chosen by God. Saul was the people’s choice. He, however, was rejected by God (125). David was God’s choice (125-126). It promises an established throne, prosperity in the land of Canaan, and God’s protection and presence (128-129). The conditions of the covenant placed upon the king were to guard the sanctuary, keep God’s law, and represent His people (129-130). If the Davidic king failed to keep these conditions, then God would judge him and Israel and exile them (131-134). When one refers to the Mosaic Covenant, they, by necessity, are referring to the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenant, for it controls both. The continuity of the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic Covenants means that it is appropriate to refer to all of them as the Old Covenant. All of them govern the kingdom of Israel (134).

After discussing the three covenants that govern the kingdom of Israel, Renihan presents the Old Covenant’s portrayal of the Messiah. “The purpose of the Old Covenant was to produce the New Covenant because the purpose of the Old Covenant was to provide the Messiah, the Christ, the Mediator of the New Covenant” (135). Within the Old Covenant, the Messiah is typologically presented in the Davidic king and is promised explicitly in prophetic literature (137-138). Also, the New Covenant and the Messiah of it are, likewise, promised (141). It is ultimately through this Messiah and His New Covenant that the nations will be blessed (142). “The kingdom of Israel and its covenants were typical shadows of Christ, the substance. As types, they were their own entities serving their own purposes in their own contexts. Yet also as types, they pointed upward and onward to something greater than themselves” (144).

The kingdom of Christ takes up the remainder of the book. Christ in His earthly ministry came to proclaim and establish a kingdom distinct from Israel. This kingdom was received by faith, had Christ as its king, and would be the full and final plan of God (151). The first Covenant discussed is the Covenant of Redemption. The Covenant of Redemption is the covenant between the persons of the Godhead to save a people from sinful humanity. “The Father sent the Son on a mission as a federal head of an elect people, constituted Him a prophet, priest, and king, sustained Him in His work, and promised Him a reward of eternal resurrected glorified life for Himself and all His people in a new creation” (157). This salvation secured in the Covenant of Redemption is mediated through the New Covenant (159).

The New Covenant is the final fulfillment and antitype of the Old Covenant. Thus, it is a better covenant built on better promises. It promises the total forgiveness of sins in justification (162). It promises regeneration and sanctification (164). It promises adoption and preservation (168-169). It promises resurrection and glorification (169-170). Its foundation is the Covenant of Redemption, which is a Covenant of Works from the Father to the Son, who kept it perfectly (171). “What Christ obtained by virtue of His obedience in the Covenant of Redemption redounds upon all those whom He represents, namely His elect people. In the New Covenant, God the Father covenants with the elect through His Son” (171).

The New Covenant governs the kingdom of Christ, which is the already manifestation of the not yet kingdom of God (208). It is from the physical seed of Abraham that Christ came. It is only union with the physical Seed, who is Christ that any become the spiritual seed of Abraham. One becomes such a child of Abraham by having a faith like Abraham’s. The unity of redemptive history is seen in the unveiling of the mystery of Christ (193). The kingdom of Christ is manifest visibly in this age in the church of Christ, which is those who have been regenerated and believed the gospel (196). These believers are baptized, becoming members of the visible Church (198). As much as is possible this side of the glory, the visible church should correspond with the invisible church (200). Those who demonstrate by unrepentant sin that their profession of faith is false are to be removed from the visible church by excommunication (201-202). Those who profess faith “enjoy the visible tokens of His promises to them” (208). These consist of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. One day “the King will return to raise and judge mankind, sending His sheep to everlasting glory in the new creation, and the goats to everlasting punishment in Hell” (208). Then the full benefits of the New Covenant will be enjoyed eternally by the elect.

Critical Evaluation

The lengthy summary above is made necessary by what Renihan states in the first chapter, namely the scope of the subject. Though the book is not long, the material covered is expansive. That said, I found the book to be a beneficial introduction to the subject of Covenant Theology. I agree with most of the conclusions and found the presentation to be immensely helpful. Renihan did achieve the goal that he set at the beginning, namely “develop and present the covenant theology of the Bible through a thorough study of the Scriptures” (7). The system is developed and presented, as can be seen in the summary above. The table of contents also covers five pages with main points and subpoints. He does not leave a single divine covenant untouched and at least mentions every key passage that deals with the subject of divine covenants. I am amazed at the amount of ground he covers in a book that is just over two hundred pages.

One of the key strengths of the book is the consistent applications of the methodology and hermeneutics presented in part one with each of the divine covenants. Readers are not left in the dark with vague terms or unstated assumptions. His presuppositions are succinctly presented and defended. The key terms of covenant and kingdom are defined. The chapter on typology does an excellent job of showing how typology is to be applied. However, the application of typology is not agreed on by all. Renihan mentions how “for some, typology was not about something other and greater; it was about two phases of the same thing” (37). Escalation in typology is not only in quantity, but quality. The antitype is not only better but different from the type. Renihan cites several passages to support this understanding of typology. In John 6:32-33, 58, Jesus calls himself the bread of life and connects it to the bread that the Israelites ate during the wilderness journey. “The bread of life was not just a lessor version of Jesus. But it pointed to Him” (32). Renihan also calls upon the book of Hebrews for support. The blood of goats is not the blood of Christ but points to it as much is stated in Hebrews 9:23-24. The ceremonial laws are shadows of the true forms and not these forms themselves, according to Hebrews 10:1 (32). With such clear examples it must be understood that antitypes are not only greater versions of their types, but substantially different and better realities pointed to by their types. This point makes many of the conclusions and summary later in the book stronger.

Another powerful support for Renihan’s conclusions later in the book is the distinction between creation and covenant. Covenants are supernatural. Man, by his nature of being a creature, is obligated to obey God’s moral law first written on his nature and later summarized in the ten commandments. God, however, is not obligated to bless such obedience. This principle is demonstrated, according to Luke 17:10. A servant who does his duties cannot hold out his hand, expecting a reward as though his master is in debt to him (13). Covenants are God’s free condescension to mankind beyond creation with laws and blessings that extend beyond what is due to God as God or man as a creature (14). “Because covenants are not natural arrangements, the specific nature and details of any given covenant are no more and no less than what God makes them to be” (15). Therefore, before we can show the relationship between any divine covenant with each other, we must first examine the covenant individually as its own covenant. If this is true, which it is, then the rejection of one Covenant of Grace with multiple administrations will necessarily follow.

The brevity Renihan’s work does lead to some drawbacks. If more space were given to exegesis of the critical text and theological reasoning, the argument and conclusions would have been stronger. For example, some deny that the relationship between Adam and God in the garden is, in fact, a covenant, even some who do acknowledge it is covenant reject that it is a covenant of works. I would not have known this if I had not read other treatments of the subject from said opposing positions. Another example of this is his treatment of the Abrahamic Covenant. All Reformed Paedobaptists understand the Abrahamic Covenant to be the Covenant of Grace just under a different administration. It would have been helpful to have a portion of this chapter to show how this is not possible. Renihan would likely point to part one as providing the rationale for his rejection of this model of covenant theology, but it would have been helpful to have seen some engagement with an opposing view or an anticipated rejection.

Renihan’s treatment excels compared to the other books I have read on the subject in how he ties concepts together and applies them to life now in the church. He does most of this tying together and applying in chapters thirteen and fourteen. He deals with the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. He deals with the subject of apostasy. As a Baptist, like Renihan, I sympathized with Renihan’s conclusion on each of these subjects and found his argument for each clear and persuasive. However, I do not believe they would persuade those who oppose his views on these subjects. For apostasy, he points to the clear passage from 1 John 2:19 that those who leave the church were not actually a part of it. I would have liked to see more engagement with the warning passages of Hebrews as these are proof texts for paedobaptists of the mixed nature of the New Covenant church and for others who reject the perseverance of the saints. I anticipate that he would respond by appealing to the analogy of faith and how the nature of the New Covenant, as described in Hebrews 8, seems to contradict such conclusions. Likewise, his presentation of baptism is helpful, but he does not address any of the arguments or proof-texts of those who oppose him. He again would likely point to part one of the book and show how sound hermeneutics and a proper understanding of interpretation lead to his conclusions. Again, though, it would be helpful to those he disagrees with or even those who are navigating this subject to see him tackle some of the critical proof text or theological reasoning of those with whom he disagrees.

To summarize my critical evaluation, Renihan does accomplish his goal of “developing and presenting the covenant theology of the Bible through a thorough study of the Scriptures.” However, in tackling such a vast subject with such brevity, he is unable to address many of the questions of those who are likely to read his book. Those who agree with him like me would like to see how this understanding of the covenants would engage and refute the claims and arguments of Reformed Paedobaptists. Those who disagree with him likely would like to see the same thing.

Conclusion

Renihan’s book is a valuable contribution to the subject of covenant theology. In it, he provides a positive biblical and systematic presentation and case for a covenant theology that closely approximates the covenant theology of seventeenth-century Particular Baptists, which he discussed at length in his book From Shadows to Substance. The Mystery of Christ is somewhat technical in parts, making it most useful for pastors and seminary students, but its length and writing style make it accessible to those without formal theological or linguistic training. It certainly would help those who are wrestling with how the Bible fits together. With this positive treatment in place, it will help future conversation between those who hold the Westminster understanding of covenant theology, those who hold to dispensationalism, those who hold to progressive covenantalism, those who hold to the view presented in this book, and everyone in between. This book spurs all its readers to dive into the Scriptures and glory in the riches of the mystery of Christ. It is worth the time and effort to read.