Dr. Fesko also objected to seeing the covenant as part of the triune life, and spent a good bit of time answering some of the points raised by Ralph Smith on that score. “The legal element in the covenant is not a problem unless one argues, as does the federal vision, that covenant is part of the opera ad intra of the trinity.”
But the covenants that are made with men are not exact reenactments of the covenantal nature of God. There are aspects of God’s nature that are communicable, and aspects that are not. Nevertheless, there should be no problem in acknowledging that there are elements in our covenants, such as the legal aspect, that answer to something in the divine nature. What we are looking for is not a Platonic form of “legal element,” but rather a transcendent and divine basis for all that we experience in covenant. I have begotten children, and the Father has begotten His Son eternally. These are not even remotely identical, but they do answer to one another, and the Bible encourages us to see it that way. So when I submit to a legal stipulation of a covenant, this is not even remotely identical to the Son obeying the will of the Father, taking the form of a servant, and dying for us. But they do answer to one another somehow.