Featured The Covenant of Works

I understand this reasoning, but I would caution against this method. That often turns into indoctrination rather than understanding of Scripture.

Contrary to what we are often told, seminary is not necessary to understand Scripture. In fact, I would argue that God chose to reach out with His revelation specifically to "laymen".

Have you not noticed that everytime we see Jesus engage scholars He explains that they lack understand, but the ones who get it are everyday people?

I believe that the Bible makes sense, and has its true meaning, when read as recorded in the text of Scripture.

 

I've read just about every Spurgeon sermon (and was gifted a set of his sermon notes).

I understand what you mean.

My favorite are often pastors who were "moderates" in how they held their theology. Spurgeon was a Calvinist but Calvinism didn't define her s doctrine. Moody was not a Calvinist but was invited often to preach at Reformed churches (they assumed he was a Calvinist). Jonathan Edwards (a fairly poor pastor, but good theologian) was a moderate Calvinist by today's standard. George Müller was a Calvinist but like Spurgeon was not defined by Calvinism (he is another of my favorites).


BTW, I mentioned Tozer previously. A W. Tozer (not a Calvinist) was born into poverty. He was self educated. His doctorates from Houghton and Wheaton were honorary. But is sermons are rich in theology he learned from the Bible.

 

@DaveXR650 ,

This is a part of a sermon that deals with our topic. I agree with this summary as it presents of the Law and the NC.

Where do you disagree?

The terms of the Mosaic covenant had been rendered null and void by the disobedience of the people; and so God speaks in a new covenant. And this covenant can’t be broken, because it’s going to ensure the spiritual response of those with whom it is made, and that by providing for the internal renovation of their character. See, Christianity is not about the imitation of Jesus Christ; it is about transformation by Jesus Christ . And that’s why many people who have embraced a “Christian” way of life still live in the guiltiness of their own sinful condition: because they have never come in repentance and in faith to the Lord and Master, Christ himself, the establisher of this new covenant, and trusted him to make real in their experience what he has made possible by his sacrifice.

You see, when the people of God could not rise to the heights of his standard, the Lord didn’t lower his standards to match their abilities; he determined to transform his people. In other words, he didn’t look out on them and say, “You know, I can see that you’re having a rough time with these Ten Commandments. Why don’t I just make it Five Commandments? And you’re sinning so much that this annual deal that we’re doing is really not covering it all. Why don’t we make it a biannual event? Or why don’t we extend the length of the warranty coverage, as it were? Well, what we’ll do is, we’ll just drop it all down, because clearly you’re not doing so well.”

No. He doesn’t do that. He instead institutes his plan from all of eternity, which is to transform his people. The previous covenant that was established at Sinai featured the promised blessings that were there in the land of Canaan, but the new covenant concerned blessings which were spiritual in nature and which were eternal in their duration. The old covenant couldn’t take away sin, couldn’t save, couldn’t justify, couldn’t make the people holy. Its obsolescence is clear for all to see.

(Alistair Begg)

 

No. NCT typically looks at the Ten Commandments as a part of a whole covenant. Normally the Sabbath is viewed as pointing to Christ Himself (as our Sabbath), if that is what you mean.

NCT holds that the Old Covenant (the Mosaic Law) cannot be divided. We can look at moral and ceremonial aspects, but it applied as a whole. (There was more than Ten Commandments). Some support is given by Christ here as when asked about the greatest command He pointed to Scripture that followed after the "Ten Commandments".

The idea is that God's moral law exists eternally because God is eternal (His moral standard therefore has to be eternal). So the Old Covenant Law reflected this moral law in an external way (and can still be used to show us sin). BUT the ultimate expression of God's moral law is in the Person of Jesus Christ.

When we sin we do not transgress the Mosaic Law because we were never under the Law, but we transgress the law of Christ - not only externally by our action but internally as that sin is a result of sinfulness or "walking in the flesh" rather than "in the Spirit".

As the sermon indicated - the Old Covenant promised land and a nation but it was broken by Israel. This covenant also points to the New Covenant (a greater covenant with greater promises) and to Christ Himself as He is its fulfillment.

 

Reisinger did not believe any of the Ten Commandments were given as a universal moral law but rather as a covenant arrangement with Israel.

NCT holds the same moral standard that Covenant Theology holds, only to a higher standard. But there is one exception for Reisinger -he believed that the Sabbath command was ceremonial rather than moral.

Regarding the Decalogue, I think we actually agree in practice. The difference is where you (if I understand you correctly) view the moral commandments being repeated in the New Covenant, I view the presence of the moral law in the Decalogue as pointing forward to the New Covenant (we are going different directions, but coming to similar conclusions).

Are there any points in the sermon I posted that you find overly problematic?

 

The primary difference is where the covenant that are listed in Scripture fall in with the overall narrative.

Looking at individual covenants (mentioned as covenants in Scripture), I'm not sure there is much of a difference.

I have thought about looking at the five main biblical covenants individually. The "Old Covenant" was the covenant that God made with Israel (as opposed to the Noahic, Abrahamic, and Davidic covenants). So I considered beginning with the Noahic, but have not decided to jump in yet.

 

What do you think, @DaveXR650 ? Is this something that we can agree on regarding the Law and NC?

The terms of the Mosaic covenant had been rendered null and void by the disobedience of the people; and so God speaks in a new covenant. And this covenant can’t be broken, because it’s going to ensure the spiritual response of those with whom it is made, and that by providing for the internal renovation of their character. See, Christianity is not about the imitation of Jesus Christ; it is about transformation by Jesus Christ . And that’s why many people who have embraced a “Christian” way of life still live in the guiltiness of their own sinful condition: because they have never come in repentance and in faith to the Lord and Master, Christ himself, the establisher of this new covenant, and trusted him to make real in their experience what he has made possible by his sacrifice.

You see, when the people of God could not rise to the heights of his standard, the Lord didn’t lower his standards to match their abilities; he determined to transform his people. In other words, he didn’t look out on them and say, “You know, I can see that you’re having a rough time with these Ten Commandments. Why don’t I just make it Five Commandments? And you’re sinning so much that this annual deal that we’re doing is really not covering it all. Why don’t we make it a biannual event? Or why don’t we extend the length of the warranty coverage, as it were? Well, what we’ll do is, we’ll just drop it all down, because clearly you’re not doing so well.”

No. He doesn’t do that. He instead institutes his plan from all of eternity, which is to transform his people. The previous covenant that was established at Sinai featured the promised blessings that were there in the land of Canaan, but the new covenant concerned blessings which were spiritual in nature and which were eternal in their duration. The old covenant couldn’t take away sin, couldn’t save, couldn’t justify, couldn’t make the people holy. Its obsolescence is clear for all to see. (Alistair Begg)

 

I'm not sure about this. I've heard preachers use illustrations presented as facts to support a sermon. It always bothered me when I discover the "fact" isn't true.

Anyway, that sermon points out the NCT position on the Old Covenant.

Sometimes we discover views are not so far apart when we discuss them.

 

Here is another to consider:

So here is the fundamental thing that needs to be grasped: When Jesus Christ came into the world, he was the fulfillment of the entire Old Testament. The Old Testament had looked forward and pointed to the coming Messiah who would bring his kingdom — his new kingly rule. And when he did, they knew things would change. There was a new-covenant promise where God’s law would be written on the heart. The old covenant would pass away. And that was already there in the prophetic writings of the Old Testament.

And now Jesus the Messiah has come, and everything has changed. And he himself gave the pointers to how they changed. The key statement that he made is in Matthew 5:17: “Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” In other words, all the precious history and forms and structures and offices in the Old Testament aren’t merely thrown away; they are consummated. They are filled up in Jesus. (John Piper)

 

Amen.

As you probably know the issue is not the commandments (God's moral law), especially since viewing the Ten Commandments as the "commandments" is a product of the English language.

Here is the difference -

Matthew 5:21–22 You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’
22 “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.

NCT holds a stricter idea of God's moral law than Covenant Theologians could imagine.

 

?? I never said anything about Covenant Theology holding that salvation is by works. What are you talking about?

 

I was agreeing with the verse you posted:

But saying that NCT holds to a deeper idea of God's moral law than Covenant Theology:

Matthew 5:21–22 You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’
22 “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.

Not that CT denies that verse (just as NCT does not reject that God's moral law applies universally). But that CT holds that we are under the Ten Commandments while NCT holds we are no longer under the Old Covenant Law.