Kingdom Prologue by Meredith C. Kline
Essentials in Biblical Theology Series
Kingdom Prologue by Meredith C. Kline[1]
Meredith Kline’s Kingdom Prologue contains several decades worth of his lectures written in book form and is therefore notably dense in its argumentation. Kline, best known for his work on suzerain-vassal treaties,[2] takes the kingdom of God as his central organizing theme and traces the series of covenants found in Genesis 1–12 to uncover how God administers his kingdom. His subtitle—Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview—makes clear that he views Genesis from a covenantal theological framework, identifying several covenants as either covenants of works or covenants of grace.
Admittedly, the book is quite dense as it is nearly 400 pages with no footnotes; thus, a few comments about its structure are in order. He divides his work into pre-flood (the world that was) and post-flood (the world that is). However, a three-fold division of Creation to Fall, Fall to Flood, and Post-Flood to the Patriarchs is the best way of identifying the structure of the book. He proceeds roughly sequentially from Gen 1–12 (though he does not make that explicit). In the pre-flood world, he looks first at the covenant of works, in which he argues that the creation of man as the image of God is a covenant-making process. He contends that each covenant of works is followed by a redemptive covenant of grace. Thus, the covenant of works with Adam is followed by a covenant of grace, seen in the curse on the serpent and promise of the seed of the woman in Gen 3:15.
The flood terminates the world that was and after the Flood God initiates a covenant, found in Gen 9. Kline describes this covenant as a common grace covenant—as opposed to a redemptive covenant—because it does not bestow the kingdom of God on an elect, redeemed people. He again proceeds to discuss the covenants of works followed by covenants of grace in the remainder of Gen 9–12.
Kline makes several distinct contributions. First, and perhaps, most significantly, he argues that there is an eschatological goal designed in creation itself. This eschatological goal is seen primarily in the Sabbath. Sabbath rest is the goal for humanity, specifically, and creation, more generally. As God takes his rest on the Sabbath, he invites humanity into this consummation of creation, which can only be obtained through the covenant of works
Second, he interprets all of Gen 1–2 in light of suzerain-vassal treaties. Many chapters begin by stating characteristics of suzerain-vassal treaties and how the portion of Genesis under investigation fits into that pattern, followed by the significance of that connection.
Third, he makes a number of proposals pertaining to a theological understanding of Eden and humanity. He identifies Eden as the microcosmic earthly version of the cosmic temple as well as the model for later temples. He further contends that man is meant to protect the sanctuary at Eden as part of “working and keeping the garden”, and, thus, Adam should have expelled the serpent from the garden. Since Eden was a probationary kingdom (another contribution), Adam’s failure to do so meant that he failed the test given to him. Finally, Kline connects the kingdom promised in Gen 3:15 (and later Gen 9) with the kingdom promised to Abraham in Gen 12:1–3.[3] As a result of the promises of Gen 3:15 and Gen 9:25–27 (and Gen 12:1–3), Kline sees two levels of the promised kingdom, which becomes more clear as the rest of Genesis unfolds. The promise of kingship made to Abraham (Gen 17:5–9) is fulfilled in David and his descendants (first level), but ultimately in Christ (second level). Abraham is promised descendants (or “Kingdom people” as Kline puts it), which is fulfilled first in an individual (Messiah) and then has corporate significance (all who have faith in Christ). Finally, the land of Canaan is promised, but eventually that promise extends to the entire world.
A final contribution he makes is distinguishing (and separating) the redemptive kingdom from the common kingdom. The civil order is grounded in the promise to Noah, not in Sinai. This differentiation enables Kline to more clearly identify how church-state relations ought to function according to the foundations in Genesis.
Though Kline’s lengthy work contains additional contributions, the above contributions are some of the most significant from a biblical-theological perspective, though I will further identify more to discuss his influence on the field of biblical theology (BT).
At the outset, Kline sets his work into the larger context of the development of BT. He takes Vos’s kingdom concept[4] as the infrastructure, and he provides the historical pattern for it. As Kline states, he performs the “prolegomenon function for the progress of biblical theology” (7). Furthermore, he analyzes the establishment of the kingdom through the covenant-making events of Gen 1–12. As evident from the structure of the first several chapters, Kline develops the concept of kingdom in a covenantal-legal direction, and he has taken Vos’s redemptive history and fused it with an Ancient Near Eastern treaty analysis. Thus, he has taken an older concept of BT and moved it forward through the specific lens of ANE treaties and Gen 1–12.
His views on Eden have appeared to influence later scholars as well.[5] Kline’s views on Eden as a temple and his claim that the goal of humanity is to spread the garden throughout the world were adopted, elaborated, and popularized by Beale (and Walton to a certain extent).[6] Kline begins tracing the theme of the seed of the woman opposed by the seed of the serpent in the early chapters of Genesis, which Alexander elsewhere traced through other portions of the OT.[7]
Perhaps most significantly, Kline was an early proponent of the “Finding Christ in the OT” movement, which many other scholars have developed.[8] He identifies Noah as a type of Christ and sees examples of typology (Christological and otherwise) throughout Genesis 1–12.
Similarly, Kline argues that eschatology was built into creation (and the creation account) itself. It is not merely a post-fall add-on (as discussed above). Kline’s ideas have explicitly influenced Edward Klink’s recent work on BT, where he discusses these matters in greater detail and highlights their significance outside of Genesis 1–12.[9]
Finally, as one might expect, Kline has been influential as it relates to covenant theology. The covenant of works is most associated with John Murray, but Kline refines Murray’s views. Specifically, he nuances the argument that the covenant of works is only found in Gen 1–2 while the covenant of grace is attested in the remainder of Scripture (Genesis 3–Revelation) by identifying more than one covenant of works in the early chapters of Genesis as well as multiple covenants of grace (both common and redemptive) in the same section.
While his work has been influential with later scholars in the BT field, I have some critiques of his work. First, some of his exposition proves to be more speculative than I am comfortable with. For example, he argues that external culture was only meant to serve a provisional purpose in the pre-consummated kingdom. However, various passages throughout Scripture at least imply, or even outright state, the value of culture, and thus, its abiding value. Moreover, he states that the covenant of circumcision is a judgment rite that points to the redemptive sacrifice of Christ. But it is not clear from any text in Genesis (and, I would argue, the NT) that circumcision has any identification with judgment. Additionally, he states that the ark was a representation of the kingdom of God—the consummated kingdom beyond the Final Judgment. While I see how Kline can infer this, this conclusion seems speculative.
Second, his work lacks any citations. While his preface indicates the book is based on his course lectures—and thus, it may be unfair to criticize it for being something it does not intend to be—it is challenging for the reader to situate this work into the larger field of BT since he does not overtly engage with other scholars or views.[10] This is perhaps the biggest weakness of Kingdom Prologue. Unless a reader is well-versed in BT from the 1950s–1990s, one would have trouble understanding the value of the book and what it specifically contributes to the field. The lack of citations or explicit engagement with other scholars is (in my opinion) the biggest weakness of the book and prevents it from better aiding Christians in the task of BT. He states that he is advancing Vos’s view, but there is an even larger conversation that the book may be found in, but the average reader (even one engaged in BT research) would be unaware of what that conversation is.
Kingdom Prologue makes many connections to the NT as well as the overarching story of Scripture, so it models faithful BT in that regard. Nevertheless, the larger connections it makes can be lost in various tangents as well as in his habit of reading the early chapters of Genesis in light of suzerain-vassal treaties. In many ways, it seems that Kline is trying to accomplish too much (even in a lengthy book) and his larger biblical-theological focus can be lost. I would be hard pressed to recommend this work to Christians who want to understand the process and method of BT because the book tends to obscure that process and method. That critique does not negate the many valuable insights contained in Kingdom Prologue but it perhaps highlights the risks of trying to accomplish too much. Had the work interacted with more scholars and focused on the connections between Genesis 1–12, the kingdom, covenant, and the rest of Scripture, its insights would be more readily perceptible and would better aid Christians in the task of BT.
Adam Day
Tyndale Theological Seminary, Netherlands (January 2026)
TL;DR
Kline has influenced subsequent scholars (specifically Beale) with regard to Eden, the purpose of humanity, and the temple.
Kline utilizes Vos’s “kingdom” structure and gives a basis for how it is developed through the covenants found in Genesis 1–12.
Kline utilizes the suzerain-vassal treaty structure and concepts to illuminate the early chapters of Genesis.
Kline argues that the eschatological goal of creation is found in creation itself, so that creation anticipates the final consummation of God’s kingdom.
Kline’s work lacks citations to situate the work in the larger field of BT, and he tries to accomplish too much; as a result, it is hard to recommend Kingdom Prologue as an aid for Christians doing BT.
[1] Meredith C. Kline, Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006).
[2] Meredith C. Kline, Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy: Studies and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963).
[3]Each of these ideas has been further refined and elaborated by later scholars, but Kline was one of the first to propose them.
[4] For more on Vos and an analysis of its significance for BT, see https://www.cebt.online/essentials-in-biblical-theology/vos-biblical-theology
[5]Admittedly, it is not always easy to identify Kline’s exact influence on later scholars as it relates to many of these issues. The publication date of the book is 2006, but as it is based on his previous decades of teaching, it is likely that scholars who might have published works earlier than Kingdom Prologue were actually influenced by his ideas as a professor. Therefore, I am attributing to Kline an influence on later scholars even though the publication dates might make it seem like Kline was influenced by them. I offer the idea of his influence on others somewhat tentatively, even if some of their works lack direct citation of Kingdom Prologue.
[6] G.K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004)
[7] Though Alexander references this theme elsewhere, it can also be seen in T. Desmond Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2022).
[8] It is possible that he was one of the first, but it is hard to pinpoint exactly where this idea started.
[9] Edward W. Klink III, The Beginning and End of All Things: A Biblical Theology of Creation and New Creation, ESBT (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2023). Colin Gunton also arrived at similar conclusions as Kline, but there does not seem to be evidence of direct influence in either direction, so my conclusion is that they arrived at similar conclusions independently. See Colin E. Gunton, The Triune Creator: A Historical and Systematic Study (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).
[10] He does provide a critique of dispensationalism at the end of the book, so to say he engages with no other views is not entirely accurate.
