I talked about this in the covenant theology thread at length: https://forums.anglican.net/threads/john-davenant-and-covenant-theology.4301/ In brief, the word covenant is present in the Scriptures sure, but what it came to be re-interpreted as, among the Reformed theologians, was something like "a series of changing rules of how man relates to God". In the "covenant of works", they said we are justified by works, but in the "covenant of grace", no no, it's totally opposite and works will not justify and now it's something else. The very nature of how we relate to God, what salvation means, how we reach and approach the divine, has kept changing, according to Covenant Theology. The question of whether "covenant theology" is in the Bible is different from whether the word "covenant" is in Bible. The Church has never understood the Covenants of the Old Testament in the way that "Covenant Theology" took over and reinterpreted the word. Very simply. The pattern that God has established, kept changing. The rules he set up, were contingent. The structure of salvation was unstable and quite mutable. You may think that that's small peanuts now, well in modern Christianity maybe. But in historic Christianity we've always seen it that God never changes his rules; the pattern he sets up is perfect for all time; the decisions he makes are not subject to alteration, ever. The one choice he makes at the beginning doesn't get revoked even at the end of the world. For ever. That's traditional Christianity. Covenant theology was formulated by a series of Reformed theologians of early modern Europe. First inklings in the late 1500s with Zacharias Ursinus and his followers; and fully developed in the Reformed churches of the Netherlands, by Johannes Cocceius. The contrast I make with Anglicanism in the above thread is, we have never allowed covenant theology within our walls, that's one of our major differences from the Reformed tradition. And even a few theologians like John Davenant that did flirt with it, put an Anglican spin on covenant theology which totally made it impractical and incompatible with the Reformed theologians. I explain in the thread. So there are huge consequences in accepting or rejecting this view, and the Anglican tradition has been universal in rejecting it.