What do you think?
Rate this book
By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism
- GenresTheologyBiblical Studies
110 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1968
About the author
Meredith G. Kline
22 books34 followersMeredith G. Kline was Professor Emeritus of Old Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He received his B.D. and Th.M. degrees from Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia) and his Ph.D. degree in Assyriology and Egyptology from Dropsie College. Professor Kline maintained an active writing and teaching ministry, serving on the faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary in Escondido, California. He was also an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The collection of essays in the recently-published Creator, Redeemer, Consummator, a festschrift written in honor of Dr. Kline, attests to the indelible influence his work has exerted on contemporary biblical and theological scholarship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
March 31, 2021
Kline, Meredith. By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1968.
This book is “early Kline” and he sharpened some of his views later in Kingdom Prologue. According to some of Kline’s students, he would rather people read KP than this book. On the other hand, this book is short, accessible, and fairly well-written. It is certainly worth your time.
A covenant is a “relationship under sanctions” (Kline 16). Sanctions is the key element and will factor largely in his 4(5) point covenant model. The sanctions go with the oath that one or both covenant partners swear. In Genesis 15 God swears an oath that the same will be done to him that was done to the split cows if God fails to live up to his covenant promise.
That’s the book in a nutshell. From that idea Kline identifies “promise-covenants” (Abraham, David) and “law-covenants” (Sinai). If God swears the oath, it is a promise covenant. If man swears the oath it is a law-covenant. He sees this contrast in Galatians 3-4. Further, Kline argues that the law-principle cannot be identified with the promise-principle, since Paul explicitly contrasts the two in Romans 3:31.
Taking his earlier definition of covenant as “relationship under sanctions,” Kline specifies that the divine covenant is “an administration of God’s lordship, consecrating a people to himself under sanctions of divine law” (36).
Circumcision: The Oath Sign of the Old Covenant
The starting point for this is the covenant ratification ceremony in Genesis 17. Things get interesting here. Kline is correct to point out the sanctions/curses aspect of the covenant (and his wonderful insights on “cutting a covenant”). Genesis 17, however, is normally viewed in line with the promise, not the sanctions. There is a warning to future generations on this covenant if they fail to circumcise. I think this is why Kline didn’t consider the book to be the final word on the subject.
Kline notes that circumcision is an “act of consecration” (44). All of this seems fairly standard. The trick is to tie it to baptism. Before making such a facile, surface-level connection, Kline continues the exploration. It’s not so much that x replaces y. Rather, in Colossians 2, we are circumcised in Christ in his “crucifixion-circumcision.” The language of baptism follows the covenantal model of circumcision: malediction, consecration, identification” (47). Seen another way: circumcision, burial, resurrection. That is Colossians 2 (and probably Romans 6).
Circumcision signifies that the sword of the Lord cuts off false servants.
John’s Baptism as Covenant Judgment
This is the best chapter in the book. It helps explain some problems Reformed have always had with John’s baptism. If circumcision/baptism is a sign and seal, and if baptism replaces circumcision, then where does John the Baptist fit in? It’s not immediately obvious. Kline notes that the elements of the covenant are already there. John the Baptist is issuing a “riv-lawsuit” to covenant-breaking Israel. He is the messenger of the covenant.
In the Old testament, passing through the waters is a covenant-ordeal (Noah, Numbers 5, etc.). It’s also more. Kline writes, “Synonymous with the motif of ordeal by water is that of ordeal by combat with sea-monsters” (60). For example, crossing the Red Sea was a battle between Yahweh and Leviathan (Isa. 51:9-10; Pss. 74:12-15; 89:10).
Christian Baptism: Oath-Sign of the New Covenant
Peter saw baptism as “a sign of judicial ordeal” by linking it “to the archetypal water ordeal, the Noahic deluge” (65; 1 Peter 3:20-22). This makes better sense of the claim “baptism now saves you,” which we normally water down to mean “salvation now saves you.” The ark/flood didn’t save Noah by magical regeneration. Water functions as the ordeal instrument. Even Peter’s language of “conscience” testifies to the judicial background. Our conscience either accuses or acquits us. It is forensic. Kline concludes, “Baptism, then, is concerned with man in the presence of God’s judgment throne” (67).
Paul does something similar in 1 Cor. 10:1ff However, the line of reasoning gets stranger (while remaining correct). Associated with the Baptism/Exodus language is also that of judicial fire, the theophanic smoke-cloud. This language avoids the problems of whether baptizo means “dip” or “sprinkle” or “plunge.” None of those words fits the situation of Israel’s being baptized, either in the Red Sea or by fire. In fact, such language makes it difficult to see how they were “baptized into Moses.” The only remaining option is that baptism is a judicial (and hence, covenantal) event.
Earlier we said you cannot simply jump from circumcision to baptism, as though the latter replaces the former. I think it does, but we have to lay the covenantal groundwork first. Only then can we approach Colossians 2. A similar parallel, as we have noted before, is in Romans 6:3. It moves like this:
Death (circumcision; Christ is ritually cut off) → accusing role by Satan/demonic antagonists (think of Yahweh’s fighting the Dragon in the Red Sea).
Conclusion: “Christian baptism is a sign of the eschatological ordeal in which the Lord of the covenant brings his servants to account” (79).
This is quite easily the best academic book on baptism I have read. The argumentation and use of sources is probably a bit too technical for the lay reader. The conclusions, however, are understandable and have been adequately developed by some of Kline’s later students (see Michael Horton, Introducing Covenant Theology).
This book is “early Kline” and he sharpened some of his views later in Kingdom Prologue. According to some of Kline’s students, he would rather people read KP than this book. On the other hand, this book is short, accessible, and fairly well-written. It is certainly worth your time.
A covenant is a “relationship under sanctions” (Kline 16). Sanctions is the key element and will factor largely in his 4(5) point covenant model. The sanctions go with the oath that one or both covenant partners swear. In Genesis 15 God swears an oath that the same will be done to him that was done to the split cows if God fails to live up to his covenant promise.
That’s the book in a nutshell. From that idea Kline identifies “promise-covenants” (Abraham, David) and “law-covenants” (Sinai). If God swears the oath, it is a promise covenant. If man swears the oath it is a law-covenant. He sees this contrast in Galatians 3-4. Further, Kline argues that the law-principle cannot be identified with the promise-principle, since Paul explicitly contrasts the two in Romans 3:31.
Taking his earlier definition of covenant as “relationship under sanctions,” Kline specifies that the divine covenant is “an administration of God’s lordship, consecrating a people to himself under sanctions of divine law” (36).
Circumcision: The Oath Sign of the Old Covenant
The starting point for this is the covenant ratification ceremony in Genesis 17. Things get interesting here. Kline is correct to point out the sanctions/curses aspect of the covenant (and his wonderful insights on “cutting a covenant”). Genesis 17, however, is normally viewed in line with the promise, not the sanctions. There is a warning to future generations on this covenant if they fail to circumcise. I think this is why Kline didn’t consider the book to be the final word on the subject.
Kline notes that circumcision is an “act of consecration” (44). All of this seems fairly standard. The trick is to tie it to baptism. Before making such a facile, surface-level connection, Kline continues the exploration. It’s not so much that x replaces y. Rather, in Colossians 2, we are circumcised in Christ in his “crucifixion-circumcision.” The language of baptism follows the covenantal model of circumcision: malediction, consecration, identification” (47). Seen another way: circumcision, burial, resurrection. That is Colossians 2 (and probably Romans 6).
Circumcision signifies that the sword of the Lord cuts off false servants.
John’s Baptism as Covenant Judgment
This is the best chapter in the book. It helps explain some problems Reformed have always had with John’s baptism. If circumcision/baptism is a sign and seal, and if baptism replaces circumcision, then where does John the Baptist fit in? It’s not immediately obvious. Kline notes that the elements of the covenant are already there. John the Baptist is issuing a “riv-lawsuit” to covenant-breaking Israel. He is the messenger of the covenant.
In the Old testament, passing through the waters is a covenant-ordeal (Noah, Numbers 5, etc.). It’s also more. Kline writes, “Synonymous with the motif of ordeal by water is that of ordeal by combat with sea-monsters” (60). For example, crossing the Red Sea was a battle between Yahweh and Leviathan (Isa. 51:9-10; Pss. 74:12-15; 89:10).
Christian Baptism: Oath-Sign of the New Covenant
Peter saw baptism as “a sign of judicial ordeal” by linking it “to the archetypal water ordeal, the Noahic deluge” (65; 1 Peter 3:20-22). This makes better sense of the claim “baptism now saves you,” which we normally water down to mean “salvation now saves you.” The ark/flood didn’t save Noah by magical regeneration. Water functions as the ordeal instrument. Even Peter’s language of “conscience” testifies to the judicial background. Our conscience either accuses or acquits us. It is forensic. Kline concludes, “Baptism, then, is concerned with man in the presence of God’s judgment throne” (67).
Paul does something similar in 1 Cor. 10:1ff However, the line of reasoning gets stranger (while remaining correct). Associated with the Baptism/Exodus language is also that of judicial fire, the theophanic smoke-cloud. This language avoids the problems of whether baptizo means “dip” or “sprinkle” or “plunge.” None of those words fits the situation of Israel’s being baptized, either in the Red Sea or by fire. In fact, such language makes it difficult to see how they were “baptized into Moses.” The only remaining option is that baptism is a judicial (and hence, covenantal) event.
Earlier we said you cannot simply jump from circumcision to baptism, as though the latter replaces the former. I think it does, but we have to lay the covenantal groundwork first. Only then can we approach Colossians 2. A similar parallel, as we have noted before, is in Romans 6:3. It moves like this:
Death (circumcision; Christ is ritually cut off) → accusing role by Satan/demonic antagonists (think of Yahweh’s fighting the Dragon in the Red Sea).
Conclusion: “Christian baptism is a sign of the eschatological ordeal in which the Lord of the covenant brings his servants to account” (79).
This is quite easily the best academic book on baptism I have read. The argumentation and use of sources is probably a bit too technical for the lay reader. The conclusions, however, are understandable and have been adequately developed by some of Kline’s later students (see Michael Horton, Introducing Covenant Theology).
June 21, 2023
*High-level reading- requires a lot of the reader.
Professor Scott Swain suggested this book as one of the top ten books to read to understand Biblical (Covenant) Theology. I see why he regards it so highly. Very good work on the justification for covenantal baptism, or the incorporation of infants as well as confessing believers into baptism.
Kline structures his position on ancient suzerain-vassal treaties where one greater king has authority over another lesser king with blessings and curses for keeping the covenant. The OT sign of circumcision was the sign of inclusion into the covenant community. Similarly, baptism is the sign of the New Covenant, which will also be administered to infants.
He concludes: "The basis for the baptism of the children of believers is thus simply their parents’ covenantal authority over them."Meredith G. Kline, By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975), 102.
Professor Scott Swain suggested this book as one of the top ten books to read to understand Biblical (Covenant) Theology. I see why he regards it so highly. Very good work on the justification for covenantal baptism, or the incorporation of infants as well as confessing believers into baptism.
Kline structures his position on ancient suzerain-vassal treaties where one greater king has authority over another lesser king with blessings and curses for keeping the covenant. The OT sign of circumcision was the sign of inclusion into the covenant community. Similarly, baptism is the sign of the New Covenant, which will also be administered to infants.
He concludes: "The basis for the baptism of the children of believers is thus simply their parents’ covenantal authority over them."Meredith G. Kline, By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975), 102.
March 1, 2021
Probably the best book I've read so far on Paedobaptism. I'm still not sold on his conclusions around covenantal authority as the basis for baptism but appreciate the work he did to get there, particularly his idea that the law covenant is the basis for the promise. It is Christ's fulfillment of the law that enables us to come to God. God's grace to us is not baseless, but dependant upon Christ's work. Always great to be reminded of these things.
July 4, 2021
There is a lot to commend in this volume. Kline presents a careful examination of Ancient Near Eastern covenants, and then seeks to apply these to scripture. As he does so, he makes one critical mistake. There are different types of covenants represented in the ANE and it is universally agreed that the Mosaic covenant represents a vassal-suzerainty treaty. So far, so good. Klines mistake is to then argue that the Abrahamic and New Covenants are also both Law covenants of the same type as the Mosaic covenant and thereby introduce curses and blessings for obedience. This is very slippery, particularly with the new covenant, and ultimately turns baptism into a forward looking sign which then becomes an oath rather than a backward looking sign (like circumcision) that testifies to the action of the Lord who is the one making the covenant with us - a promise covenant - not a law covenant.
What I really appreciate about Klines work though is that it represents a thoroughly covenantal understanding of baptism, and provides a better foundation for infant baptism than appeals to tradition. If that is what you’re after, this is a great book - though the issues I’ve pointed to above need a better defence than that given in this volume.
What I really appreciate about Klines work though is that it represents a thoroughly covenantal understanding of baptism, and provides a better foundation for infant baptism than appeals to tradition. If that is what you’re after, this is a great book - though the issues I’ve pointed to above need a better defence than that given in this volume.
February 23, 2026
By Oath Consigned is not only one of Meredith Kline’s most important works for understanding his overall theology, but it is also one of the most influential 20th century contributions to Reformed covenant theology. Almost every significant volume on covenant theology and the sacraments has had to interact with Kline in some way since the publication of By Oath Consigned.
The volume is a collection of short, albeit dense, essays that articulate the foundations for covenant theology and the oath-signs that constitute entrance into covenant membership, namely circumcision and baptism. Central to Kline’s covenant theology are two key methodological principles: 1) cultural comparison and 2) the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology. Regarding cultural comparison, Kline places a heavy methodological weight on extra-biblical covenant-treaties contemporaneous with biblical covenants. The multiple extant evidences that show how other Ancient Near East international treaties were conducted provide invaluable contextual insight into how we ought to interpret the dynamics of covenant making in Scripture itself. With comparative context informing biblical interpretation, one is able to trace the contours of covenant-making throughout the biblical record, which provides the exegetical and biblical-theological basis for systematic synthesis. A consistent worry of Kline’s is the eisegetical reading of particular covenants in Scripture that is informed predominantly from a systematic theology of the covenants rather than the biblical witness itself (Kline does admit that one cannot fully sever the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology, but he is set on correcting the real error of reading systematic theology back into Scripture in an unwarranted and irresponsible manner; see 26n1).
When these two methodological principles come together, Kline argues for a law-oriented understanding of the covenants, meaning that all covenants involve some kind of legal-righteousness standard that derives from the will of God and to which humans are to obey. Central for this contention is the role of the oath in covenantal bindings. Paradigmatic examples are seen in Genesis 15 and Exodus 24. In the former, God takes the covenant oath upon himself, thereby subjecting himself to the curses of the covenant should he ever break it (which necessarily implies that it is a covenant of grace towards Abraham and his posterity because God cannot fail nor lie), whereas in the latter, Israel makes the oath of the covenant, thereby taking upon themselves the full conditions of the covenant, namely blessing for obedience and cursing for disobedience. Kline’s characterization of the covenant made at Sinai is a major point of debate within covenant theology, especially as Kline would go on to develop his understanding of republication in later works, such as Kingdom Prologue. In this work, however, one finds Kline attempting to balance his arguments within the tension of his convictions regarding the particular nature of covenants with broader theological considerations, especially in regard to the traditional Reformed understanding of the covenant of grace. The reader definitely feels this tension on page 18 when Kline affirms several truths about the overall redemptive context in which the Sinaitic covenant is made, and then also affirms that “the covenantal transaction of Exodus 19–24 cannot be defined in terms of a unilateral promissory commitment from the divine side. This particular engagement was, on the contrary, constituted a covenant by Israel’s formal pledging of obedience to God’s law. It was a law covenant” (18).
Kline goes further, however, to argue that law actually forms the very basis of all covenants in Scripture and that “coherence can be achieved in Covenant Theology only by the subordination of grace to law” (35). Kline argues for this from multiple angles, two of which are worth noting: 1) the nature of the pre-redemptive covenant (traditionally labeled the covenant of works, a term that Kline does not like because it minimizes the law-principle; see 32) is in essence a law covenant wherein God voluntarily stipulates conditions of obedience to his created humanity represented by Adam, the violation of such conditions bringing cursing, which in turn implies that the obedience to which brings blessing (it is noteworthy that Kline does contend that there is a sense in which grace is present prior to the fall, namely in the sense that God did not have to bestow all of the gifts and glory that he did for his creation; see 36). Since the covenant of creation (Kline’s preferred term) was violated and Adam’s federal headship is inviolable, all of humanity is rendered to the status of covenant breakers, called to full and perfect obedience to the law of God despite their own sin and inevitable failure to do so. This covenant conditionality characterizes all covenants, even those traditionally labeled covenants of promise or grace, such as the Abrahamic covenant or even the New Covenant. This is seen all the more in the second major argument from Kline which is a corollary of the first, namely the active and passive obedience of the second Adam, Jesus Christ. Christ’s active obedience to the law of God is inherently a covenantal obedience that fulfills the stipulations of the covenant of creation, which are informed by the moral law of God. So, even though the new covenant in Christ is characterized by grace for all of the elect in regards to their own individual salvation, the foundation for all of Christ’s saving benefits, especially that of justification, is the legal obedience and merit achieved by the righteous life of Christ, the very righteousness and merit that Adam failed to achieve by means of his obedience to God’s command in the covenant of creation. Kline summarizes the main point he is making: “the difference [between a pre-redemptive and redemptive covenant] is rather that redemptive covenant adds promise to law. Redemptive covenant is simultaneously a promise administration of guaranteed blessings and a law administration of blessing dependent on obedience, with the latter foundational” (32).
With these inner mechanics in place, Kline defines covenant as follows: “God’s covenant with man may be defined as an administration of God’s lordship, consecrating a people to himself under the sanctions of divine law. In more general terms, it is a sovereign administration of the kingdom of God” (36). The kingdom of God, therefore, is the final end for God’s covenant-making purposes. Kline then offers his own reoriented terminology of covenant theology: “if a general unifying term were desired it might then be Covenant of the Kingdom. For the two major divisions of the Covenant of the Kingdom our suggestions would be Covenant of Creation and Covenant of Redemption” (37).
Once Kline lays these foundations for covenant theology, he then moves to his exposition of the oath-signs of the covenants, namely circumcision and baptism. Perhaps the most important and influential argument for this entire volume is that circumcision and baptism are initiatory signs of God’s covenant of redemption that function as an oath of allegiance to Yahweh/Christ, consecrating all who receive the sign to the people of God, while also embodying the dual-nature of covenant in its sanctioned conditions and promises. That is, circumcision embodies in its very symbolic nature the threat of being cut off from the people of God if one were to disobey God’s covenantal commandments, while also symbolizing the status of being separated from all other peoples as a nation blessed by God (albeit Kline emphasizes the former over the latter due to the fallen state of creation). Kline connects Genesis 15 and 17 in this specific regard; just as Yahweh travels through the cut animals, thereby taking a self-maledictory oath (i.e., God is saying that if he should violate the covenant, let him be cut up in the same way as the animals), so Abraham receives the covenant sign of the cutting of the foreskin (note that Kline does not discuss the actual mechanics of how circumcision would surgically take place during this time in history, which is very different from our own contemporary practice of circumcision in America), thereby symbolizing in their own flesh the covenantal reality that Abraham and his posterity were “under the judicial authority and more precisely under the sword of God Almighty” (42). Kline further explains the mechanics of the symbol of judgment in circumcision by connecting the circumcision of Isaac, the promised son of Abraham, and God’s later command to sacrifice Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22, and is worth quoting in full: “With this demand laid upon Abraham to perfect the circumcision of his son [that is, fully display the reality to which circumcision pointed, namely the judgment of God], he was confronted with the dilemma of circumcision-consecration. The son of Adam who would consecrate himself to God in the obedience of covenant service can do so only by passing through the judgment curse which circumcision symbolizes. Isaac must be cut off in death at the altar of God. In the circumcision of the foreskin on the eighth day he had passed under the judgment knife of God apart from God’s altar in a merely symbolic, token act of conditional malediction. But this cutting off of the whole body of Isaac’s flesh to be consumed in the fire of the altar of God was a falling under the actual judgment curse” (44). But, as we know how the story goes, God provides a ram for the sacrifice. Kline thus makes the final and ultimate connection to Christ and his circumcision, which is ultimately the crucifixion: “Read together in the light of fulfillment, the three cutting rituals of Genesis 15, 17, and 22 proclaim the mystery of a divine circumcision – the circumcision of God in the crucifixion of his only-begotten. Paul called it ‘the circumcision of Christ’ (Col. [2]:11). The circumcision of the infant Jesus in obedience to Genesis 17, the partial and symbolic cutting off, corresponded to the ritual of Genesis 15 as a passing of one who was divine under the curse threat of the covenant oath. That was the moment, prophetically chosen, to name him ‘Jesus.’ But it was the circumcision of Christ in crucifixion that answered to the burnt-offering of Genesis 22 as a perfection of circumcision, a ‘putting off’ not merely of a token part, but ‘of the [whole] body of the flesh’ (Col. 2:11, ARV), not simply a symbolic oath-cursing but a cutting off of ‘the body of his flesh through death’ (Col. 1:22) in accursed darkness and dereliction” (45). In summary, “the theology of circumcision can be summarized in the ideas of malediction, consecration, identification, justification, and spiritual qualification…. In [the light of ancient rituals of covenant ratification in both ANE and biblical contexts], circumcision is found to be an -oath rite and, as such, a pledge of consecration and a symbol of melediction…. By circumcision, the sign of the consecratory oath of the Abrahamic Covenant, a man confessed himself to be under the juridical authority of Yahweh and consigned himself to the ordeal of his Lord’s judgment for the final verdict on his life. The sign of circumcision thus pointed to the eschatological judicial ordeal with its awful sanctions of eternal weal or woe” (47–48). Although Kline argues for this in a later chapter in the book, circumcision’s significance is also inextricably bound to its administration upon the male organ of reproduction. Kline’s emphasis for this observation is that by marking the organ of reproduction, the covenant obligations are imposed upon all of the descendants who come forth from the generation of life. “The circumcision oath-rite was also a sign of consecration [also in that was also a sign of malediction], and in relation to that the meaning of the application of the circumcision sign to the male organ of generation would be that the descendants of the circumcised were consecrated with him to the Lord of covenant” (88). This aspect of circumcision provides a foundational element for informing the Reformed position on paedobaptism, which Kline then goes on to argue for with an exposition of the household-codes and authority principle in the New Testament.
Returning to Kline’s initial connection between circumcision and baptism, Kline argues that baptism similarly symbolizes the judgment of God, and therefore displays in its administration the promise of cursing should the Christian trample upon the blood of the covenant (see Hebrews 10:28–29). Kline first argues for the continuity between circumcision and baptism as oath-signs that are grounded in trials by ordeal, wherein the partaker of the sign either passes under the knife of judgment or passes through the waters of judgment; the partaker of the sign will either be cut off or drowned in judgment, or will pass through in vindication. Kline traces this understanding of baptism all the way from Genesis 1 to Noah’s flood, the Exodus through the Red Sea, the crossing of the River Jordan, the baptism of John the Baptist (whom Kline retitles John the Forerunner, a theologically apt name), the baptism of Jesus, the cross of Christ, and the baptism of believers and their children. Very importantly, Jesus’s crucifixion is not just the perfection of his circumcision (and thus the antitypical fulfillment of circumcision as a covenant sign), but it is also a baptism, in that Jesus experiences the eschatological wrath of God in place of the elect upon the cross. This reality informs Paul’s logic in Colossians 2:11–14 wherein circumcision and baptism are interrelated in and through the death and resurrection of Christ. Also important, judgment does not exhaust the meaning of baptism; justification is also intrinsic to its meaning as a trial by ordeal. Since Christ fulfilled the law of God, he is pure and innocent. Therefore, his passing under the judgment knife and judgment waters of God does not result in his perishing, but rather in his vindication and justification, seen in his resurrection and ascension.
Much more could be said in explication of Kline’s argument, but we will limit ourselves to interesting points in Kline’s overall argument and brief critiques. First, it is noteworthy how some traditional elements of circumcision and baptism are absent from this work, and it is unclear whether this work is meant to be interpreted as explaining what these signs mean in toto or whether this is a fuller examination of a few specific elements. The clearest nod to additional meanings is found in 83n32 wherein Kline grants that cleansing is a legitimate locus of meaning for baptism that can largely inform and vindicate the baptismal mode of sprinkling. Cleansing as a locus of meaning for circumcision, however, is largely if not entirely absent. Others, such as O. Palmer Robertson, have argued for cleansing and purification being a central component of the meaning of circumcision, so it is illuminating that Kline does not mention purity/cleansing in regard to circumcision.
Another interesting doctrinal point that Kline argues for is that his understanding of the initiatory rites of circumcision and baptism dual-oath signs implies that presumptive regeneration is unnecessary for paedobaptism (90). Kline contends that “no theory of presumptive regeneration as the basis for the administration of baptism to infants could be reared on the foundation of law covenant. Neither, on our approach, would the baptism of the infants of believers signify a divine promise that they were destined to secure the blessings of the covenant sooner or later. Hence, there would be no need to theorize how the baptism of such might serve as a means of conveying to them the grace supposedly sealed to them by the rite, much less to apologize for the numerous cases in which that grace never is conveyed” (90). The strength of the dual-oath understanding of baptism is very apparent here; baptism can be administered to infants because as a covenant sign that communicates covenantal obligations and promises, it retains its force and meaning even if the infant grows up to be a non-Christian, for baptism will function as a sign of judgment rather than a sign of blessing, which would come about if the infant grows up into the faith. Kline, however, overcorrects, I think, in the total denial of presumptive regeneration, especially when the issue is framed by the principle of charity, namely that the church ought to treat all baptized children as regenerate until proven otherwise.
As for broader critique, one wonders if Kline is relying too much on the comparative method for establishing his theology of the covenants. Certainly there will be continuity between Israel and her surrounding cultures, but there will also be discontinuity since Israel is the chosen people of God, unlike all other nations in the ANE. This potentiality is apparent when the evidential grounds for some of Kline’s interpretations regarding the dual-oath seems circumstantial at best. One also wonders how connected Kline’s dual-oath understanding of the sacraments is with his understanding of republication. Given how influential Kline’s arguments concerning circumcision and baptism are, along with the variation of understandings of republication, it would seem that the two do not fall together, but this is still a worry.
Overall, By Oath Consigned: A Repinterpretation of of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism is a landmark work in Reformed and covenant theology that is a must-read for any who wants understand the biblical and theological dimensions the covenants and their signs.
The volume is a collection of short, albeit dense, essays that articulate the foundations for covenant theology and the oath-signs that constitute entrance into covenant membership, namely circumcision and baptism. Central to Kline’s covenant theology are two key methodological principles: 1) cultural comparison and 2) the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology. Regarding cultural comparison, Kline places a heavy methodological weight on extra-biblical covenant-treaties contemporaneous with biblical covenants. The multiple extant evidences that show how other Ancient Near East international treaties were conducted provide invaluable contextual insight into how we ought to interpret the dynamics of covenant making in Scripture itself. With comparative context informing biblical interpretation, one is able to trace the contours of covenant-making throughout the biblical record, which provides the exegetical and biblical-theological basis for systematic synthesis. A consistent worry of Kline’s is the eisegetical reading of particular covenants in Scripture that is informed predominantly from a systematic theology of the covenants rather than the biblical witness itself (Kline does admit that one cannot fully sever the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology, but he is set on correcting the real error of reading systematic theology back into Scripture in an unwarranted and irresponsible manner; see 26n1).
When these two methodological principles come together, Kline argues for a law-oriented understanding of the covenants, meaning that all covenants involve some kind of legal-righteousness standard that derives from the will of God and to which humans are to obey. Central for this contention is the role of the oath in covenantal bindings. Paradigmatic examples are seen in Genesis 15 and Exodus 24. In the former, God takes the covenant oath upon himself, thereby subjecting himself to the curses of the covenant should he ever break it (which necessarily implies that it is a covenant of grace towards Abraham and his posterity because God cannot fail nor lie), whereas in the latter, Israel makes the oath of the covenant, thereby taking upon themselves the full conditions of the covenant, namely blessing for obedience and cursing for disobedience. Kline’s characterization of the covenant made at Sinai is a major point of debate within covenant theology, especially as Kline would go on to develop his understanding of republication in later works, such as Kingdom Prologue. In this work, however, one finds Kline attempting to balance his arguments within the tension of his convictions regarding the particular nature of covenants with broader theological considerations, especially in regard to the traditional Reformed understanding of the covenant of grace. The reader definitely feels this tension on page 18 when Kline affirms several truths about the overall redemptive context in which the Sinaitic covenant is made, and then also affirms that “the covenantal transaction of Exodus 19–24 cannot be defined in terms of a unilateral promissory commitment from the divine side. This particular engagement was, on the contrary, constituted a covenant by Israel’s formal pledging of obedience to God’s law. It was a law covenant” (18).
Kline goes further, however, to argue that law actually forms the very basis of all covenants in Scripture and that “coherence can be achieved in Covenant Theology only by the subordination of grace to law” (35). Kline argues for this from multiple angles, two of which are worth noting: 1) the nature of the pre-redemptive covenant (traditionally labeled the covenant of works, a term that Kline does not like because it minimizes the law-principle; see 32) is in essence a law covenant wherein God voluntarily stipulates conditions of obedience to his created humanity represented by Adam, the violation of such conditions bringing cursing, which in turn implies that the obedience to which brings blessing (it is noteworthy that Kline does contend that there is a sense in which grace is present prior to the fall, namely in the sense that God did not have to bestow all of the gifts and glory that he did for his creation; see 36). Since the covenant of creation (Kline’s preferred term) was violated and Adam’s federal headship is inviolable, all of humanity is rendered to the status of covenant breakers, called to full and perfect obedience to the law of God despite their own sin and inevitable failure to do so. This covenant conditionality characterizes all covenants, even those traditionally labeled covenants of promise or grace, such as the Abrahamic covenant or even the New Covenant. This is seen all the more in the second major argument from Kline which is a corollary of the first, namely the active and passive obedience of the second Adam, Jesus Christ. Christ’s active obedience to the law of God is inherently a covenantal obedience that fulfills the stipulations of the covenant of creation, which are informed by the moral law of God. So, even though the new covenant in Christ is characterized by grace for all of the elect in regards to their own individual salvation, the foundation for all of Christ’s saving benefits, especially that of justification, is the legal obedience and merit achieved by the righteous life of Christ, the very righteousness and merit that Adam failed to achieve by means of his obedience to God’s command in the covenant of creation. Kline summarizes the main point he is making: “the difference [between a pre-redemptive and redemptive covenant] is rather that redemptive covenant adds promise to law. Redemptive covenant is simultaneously a promise administration of guaranteed blessings and a law administration of blessing dependent on obedience, with the latter foundational” (32).
With these inner mechanics in place, Kline defines covenant as follows: “God’s covenant with man may be defined as an administration of God’s lordship, consecrating a people to himself under the sanctions of divine law. In more general terms, it is a sovereign administration of the kingdom of God” (36). The kingdom of God, therefore, is the final end for God’s covenant-making purposes. Kline then offers his own reoriented terminology of covenant theology: “if a general unifying term were desired it might then be Covenant of the Kingdom. For the two major divisions of the Covenant of the Kingdom our suggestions would be Covenant of Creation and Covenant of Redemption” (37).
Once Kline lays these foundations for covenant theology, he then moves to his exposition of the oath-signs of the covenants, namely circumcision and baptism. Perhaps the most important and influential argument for this entire volume is that circumcision and baptism are initiatory signs of God’s covenant of redemption that function as an oath of allegiance to Yahweh/Christ, consecrating all who receive the sign to the people of God, while also embodying the dual-nature of covenant in its sanctioned conditions and promises. That is, circumcision embodies in its very symbolic nature the threat of being cut off from the people of God if one were to disobey God’s covenantal commandments, while also symbolizing the status of being separated from all other peoples as a nation blessed by God (albeit Kline emphasizes the former over the latter due to the fallen state of creation). Kline connects Genesis 15 and 17 in this specific regard; just as Yahweh travels through the cut animals, thereby taking a self-maledictory oath (i.e., God is saying that if he should violate the covenant, let him be cut up in the same way as the animals), so Abraham receives the covenant sign of the cutting of the foreskin (note that Kline does not discuss the actual mechanics of how circumcision would surgically take place during this time in history, which is very different from our own contemporary practice of circumcision in America), thereby symbolizing in their own flesh the covenantal reality that Abraham and his posterity were “under the judicial authority and more precisely under the sword of God Almighty” (42). Kline further explains the mechanics of the symbol of judgment in circumcision by connecting the circumcision of Isaac, the promised son of Abraham, and God’s later command to sacrifice Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22, and is worth quoting in full: “With this demand laid upon Abraham to perfect the circumcision of his son [that is, fully display the reality to which circumcision pointed, namely the judgment of God], he was confronted with the dilemma of circumcision-consecration. The son of Adam who would consecrate himself to God in the obedience of covenant service can do so only by passing through the judgment curse which circumcision symbolizes. Isaac must be cut off in death at the altar of God. In the circumcision of the foreskin on the eighth day he had passed under the judgment knife of God apart from God’s altar in a merely symbolic, token act of conditional malediction. But this cutting off of the whole body of Isaac’s flesh to be consumed in the fire of the altar of God was a falling under the actual judgment curse” (44). But, as we know how the story goes, God provides a ram for the sacrifice. Kline thus makes the final and ultimate connection to Christ and his circumcision, which is ultimately the crucifixion: “Read together in the light of fulfillment, the three cutting rituals of Genesis 15, 17, and 22 proclaim the mystery of a divine circumcision – the circumcision of God in the crucifixion of his only-begotten. Paul called it ‘the circumcision of Christ’ (Col. [2]:11). The circumcision of the infant Jesus in obedience to Genesis 17, the partial and symbolic cutting off, corresponded to the ritual of Genesis 15 as a passing of one who was divine under the curse threat of the covenant oath. That was the moment, prophetically chosen, to name him ‘Jesus.’ But it was the circumcision of Christ in crucifixion that answered to the burnt-offering of Genesis 22 as a perfection of circumcision, a ‘putting off’ not merely of a token part, but ‘of the [whole] body of the flesh’ (Col. 2:11, ARV), not simply a symbolic oath-cursing but a cutting off of ‘the body of his flesh through death’ (Col. 1:22) in accursed darkness and dereliction” (45). In summary, “the theology of circumcision can be summarized in the ideas of malediction, consecration, identification, justification, and spiritual qualification…. In [the light of ancient rituals of covenant ratification in both ANE and biblical contexts], circumcision is found to be an -oath rite and, as such, a pledge of consecration and a symbol of melediction…. By circumcision, the sign of the consecratory oath of the Abrahamic Covenant, a man confessed himself to be under the juridical authority of Yahweh and consigned himself to the ordeal of his Lord’s judgment for the final verdict on his life. The sign of circumcision thus pointed to the eschatological judicial ordeal with its awful sanctions of eternal weal or woe” (47–48). Although Kline argues for this in a later chapter in the book, circumcision’s significance is also inextricably bound to its administration upon the male organ of reproduction. Kline’s emphasis for this observation is that by marking the organ of reproduction, the covenant obligations are imposed upon all of the descendants who come forth from the generation of life. “The circumcision oath-rite was also a sign of consecration [also in that was also a sign of malediction], and in relation to that the meaning of the application of the circumcision sign to the male organ of generation would be that the descendants of the circumcised were consecrated with him to the Lord of covenant” (88). This aspect of circumcision provides a foundational element for informing the Reformed position on paedobaptism, which Kline then goes on to argue for with an exposition of the household-codes and authority principle in the New Testament.
Returning to Kline’s initial connection between circumcision and baptism, Kline argues that baptism similarly symbolizes the judgment of God, and therefore displays in its administration the promise of cursing should the Christian trample upon the blood of the covenant (see Hebrews 10:28–29). Kline first argues for the continuity between circumcision and baptism as oath-signs that are grounded in trials by ordeal, wherein the partaker of the sign either passes under the knife of judgment or passes through the waters of judgment; the partaker of the sign will either be cut off or drowned in judgment, or will pass through in vindication. Kline traces this understanding of baptism all the way from Genesis 1 to Noah’s flood, the Exodus through the Red Sea, the crossing of the River Jordan, the baptism of John the Baptist (whom Kline retitles John the Forerunner, a theologically apt name), the baptism of Jesus, the cross of Christ, and the baptism of believers and their children. Very importantly, Jesus’s crucifixion is not just the perfection of his circumcision (and thus the antitypical fulfillment of circumcision as a covenant sign), but it is also a baptism, in that Jesus experiences the eschatological wrath of God in place of the elect upon the cross. This reality informs Paul’s logic in Colossians 2:11–14 wherein circumcision and baptism are interrelated in and through the death and resurrection of Christ. Also important, judgment does not exhaust the meaning of baptism; justification is also intrinsic to its meaning as a trial by ordeal. Since Christ fulfilled the law of God, he is pure and innocent. Therefore, his passing under the judgment knife and judgment waters of God does not result in his perishing, but rather in his vindication and justification, seen in his resurrection and ascension.
Much more could be said in explication of Kline’s argument, but we will limit ourselves to interesting points in Kline’s overall argument and brief critiques. First, it is noteworthy how some traditional elements of circumcision and baptism are absent from this work, and it is unclear whether this work is meant to be interpreted as explaining what these signs mean in toto or whether this is a fuller examination of a few specific elements. The clearest nod to additional meanings is found in 83n32 wherein Kline grants that cleansing is a legitimate locus of meaning for baptism that can largely inform and vindicate the baptismal mode of sprinkling. Cleansing as a locus of meaning for circumcision, however, is largely if not entirely absent. Others, such as O. Palmer Robertson, have argued for cleansing and purification being a central component of the meaning of circumcision, so it is illuminating that Kline does not mention purity/cleansing in regard to circumcision.
Another interesting doctrinal point that Kline argues for is that his understanding of the initiatory rites of circumcision and baptism dual-oath signs implies that presumptive regeneration is unnecessary for paedobaptism (90). Kline contends that “no theory of presumptive regeneration as the basis for the administration of baptism to infants could be reared on the foundation of law covenant. Neither, on our approach, would the baptism of the infants of believers signify a divine promise that they were destined to secure the blessings of the covenant sooner or later. Hence, there would be no need to theorize how the baptism of such might serve as a means of conveying to them the grace supposedly sealed to them by the rite, much less to apologize for the numerous cases in which that grace never is conveyed” (90). The strength of the dual-oath understanding of baptism is very apparent here; baptism can be administered to infants because as a covenant sign that communicates covenantal obligations and promises, it retains its force and meaning even if the infant grows up to be a non-Christian, for baptism will function as a sign of judgment rather than a sign of blessing, which would come about if the infant grows up into the faith. Kline, however, overcorrects, I think, in the total denial of presumptive regeneration, especially when the issue is framed by the principle of charity, namely that the church ought to treat all baptized children as regenerate until proven otherwise.
As for broader critique, one wonders if Kline is relying too much on the comparative method for establishing his theology of the covenants. Certainly there will be continuity between Israel and her surrounding cultures, but there will also be discontinuity since Israel is the chosen people of God, unlike all other nations in the ANE. This potentiality is apparent when the evidential grounds for some of Kline’s interpretations regarding the dual-oath seems circumstantial at best. One also wonders how connected Kline’s dual-oath understanding of the sacraments is with his understanding of republication. Given how influential Kline’s arguments concerning circumcision and baptism are, along with the variation of understandings of republication, it would seem that the two do not fall together, but this is still a worry.
Overall, By Oath Consigned: A Repinterpretation of of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism is a landmark work in Reformed and covenant theology that is a must-read for any who wants understand the biblical and theological dimensions the covenants and their signs.
February 17, 2014
This book has been out of print for years. I have an electronic copy if anyone would like a copy please message me privately with your e-mail...
This was one of the most important books that my former Pastor Dave Sherwood told me about years ago as I was just coming into the Presbyterian Church and struggling with some aspects of Covenant Theology. Dave studied under Meredith Kline and I have grown to love him as well. I just wish I could have met him...
I am re-reading this again now!
This was one of the most important books that my former Pastor Dave Sherwood told me about years ago as I was just coming into the Presbyterian Church and struggling with some aspects of Covenant Theology. Dave studied under Meredith Kline and I have grown to love him as well. I just wish I could have met him...
I am re-reading this again now!
February 13, 2018
Best book of Kline in my view (by far more readable than Kingdom Prologue). It sums up all his thought (covenant theology, circumcision and baptism, biblical theology ...). The best defense of pedobaptism and pedobaptist covenant theology. But if you want Kline more complete and last system you need to read Kingdom Prologue and this article written by Lee Irons (http://www.upper-register.com/papers/...).
May 23, 2013
Excellent and provocative.
May 30, 2021
By Oath Consigned expands the arguments of Kline’s Treaty of the Great King and applies the particularly covenantal character of these treaties to circumcision and baptism as confessional oath-signs of consecration to the covenant Lord. It’s this character as oath-signs that clarifies the relationship between circumcision and baptism while providing fertile ground for the inclusion of children in the covenant, and by consequence, their inclusion in the sacrament of baptism. While acknowledging that Kline later refines and reformulates some of these ideas, the covenantal framework laid out is still particularly useful for understanding circumcision and baptism in their biblical-theological context.
August 3, 2021
For what I wanted, this was a clear and concise take from Kline. He sets forth thoughts on baptism signifying both blessings and curses as it pertains to the covenant he defines as “An administration of God’s lordship, consecrating a people good himself under the sanctions of divine law.” He has a more unique argument for infant baptism based off parental authority in the last chapter.
The journey continues.
The journey continues.
July 14, 2017
This is a short but important book on the covenants, covenant signs, and biblical-systematic theology in general. Lots of new insights here, and a good place to begin with Meredith Kline. It is out of print, however. You can also study along by podcast with two Kline aficionados at http://www.meredithkline.com/glory-cl.... Looking forward to reading more by this author.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews