Among some representatives of 1689 federalism, this dialectical tension wherein the covenant of grace both communicated Christ’s benefits and was not administered ends up breaking the wrong direction. Although the covenants of the old economy “carried the promise of another covenant,” they revealed but did not apply the substance of this covenant of grace.
More specifically, “Through typology, the Old Covenant portrayed salvation in Jesus Christ, but it did not offer salvation in and of itself.” This point becomes clear as Renihan argued: “The covenant of grace is the in-breaking of the covenant of redemption into history through the progressive revelation and retroactive application of the New Covenant.” For Reformed covenant theology, the ordinances of the OT covenants serve as means of grace to apply Christ and his benefits proactively, namely in advance, to believers before Christ came. The 1689 federalist position that new covenant blessings retroactively applied to OT believers entails that those saints did not receive the full experience of saving benefits until after Christ inaugurated the new covenant. Far from reading too much into infelicitous words, Renihan has written a whole volume explicitly defending the notion that OT saints did not enter heaven until after Christ came in the incarnation. Although he affirmed that OT believers trusted in Christ, which guaranteed their future rescue from Sheol as a place of privation, he nonetheless resolved the dialectical tension about the lack of administration for the covenant of grace by rejecting that OT believers had the full experience of Christ’s blessings, specifically in that they did not enter heaven until Christ came in the incarnation.Harrison Perkins, “Peering Over the Fence: Presbyterian Reflections on Baptist Neighbors Doing Covenant Theology,” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 29/3 (Fall 2025), 28–29.
RESOURCES
- Subscribe to The Heidelblog!
- Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
- Browse the Heidelshop!
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization
Harrison Perkins
Harrison Perkins (PhD, Queen’s University Belfast; MDiv, Westminster Seminary California) is pastor of Oakland Hills Community Church (OPC), a member of the of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, a Senior Research Fellow at the Craig Center for the Study of the Westminster Standards, online instructor in church history at Westminster Theological Seminary, a visiting lecturer in systematic theology at Edinburgh Theological Seminary, and author of Reformed Covenant Theology: A Systematic Introduction. You can read more from him at Pastor Perks.
More by Harrison Perkins ›
Did the Old Testament saints receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? If so, how are we to understand Jesus promising the Spirit upon his ascent? If not, how are we to understand the OT method of sanctification?
Here’s how I got at this:
Jude 5 (in the best text) says “Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.” 1 Cor 10:1-8 says:
God the Son was present in, with, and under the types and shadows. Where the Son is, the substance of the covenant is present. The Spirit of God is active in, with, and under the types and shadows (e.g., Nu 24:2; 1 Sam 10:10; 2 Chron 24:20; Ps 139:7; Isa 61:1; Isa 63:10). Arguably, the glory cloud theophanies (e.g., Ex 13:21; 14:19, 24; 16:10; Ex 24:15; 33:9; 40:34) were manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Peter identifies the “Spirit of God and the Spirit of glory” in 1 Pet 4:14.
The outpouring the Spirit at Pentecost is a new thing in redemptive history. It is the inbreaking of the end and the fulfillment of Jer 31:31-34 but it is not the first appearing of the Spirit in the history of redemption. Now, in the New Covenant, we all receive the Holy Spirit in a way that formerly only some did but in the application of redemption, no one ever came to faith without the mysterious operation of the Sprit.
I remember that David Murray did a short series on this about fifteen years ago, and I found it very helpful. He makes the case that Old Testament believers were indeed indwelt by the Holy Spirit:
“No one can be born again, believe, or repent without the inward work of the Holy Spirit. And no one can remain a believer for even one second without the ongoing internal work of the Holy Spirit—whether in the OT or the NT. Without the Spirit constantly in and at work in our hearts, we would immediately apostatize” (https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/09/14/did-the-holy-spirit-indwell-ot-believers/).
At the same time, Murray notes that the Spirit’s ministry in the Old Covenant was more like a steady, continual drip of water, whereas at Pentecost in the New Covenant era there is a true outpouring. In other words (and in agreement with Dr. Clark’s response), there is continuity of substance across the testaments while still maintaining the uniqueness and superiority of the Spirit’s work in the post-Pentecost application of redemption.
Others argue differently. Some maintain that the Spirit brought about regeneration in Old Testament saints but reserve His permanent indwelling ministry as something entirely unique to New Covenant believers. Jim Hamilton has written extensively in support of this position, in contrast to the view Murray advocates.
Perhaps it is not surprising that a Reformed minister sees more continuity at this point, whereas a Baptist pastor-theologian sees more discontinuity 🙂.