Featured Christocentric Theology (New Covenant Theology): The Big Nothing Burger

The Primitive Baptists believe that Scripture teaches that the subject of justification has various phases (by grace, by blood, by faith, and by works), some of which do not have eternal implications; hence, the word "alone" is misleading. If we were forced to employ the word "alone", we would rather speak of "justification by grace alone" or "justification by blood alone". We believe that the Calvinist errs by assuming the noun "faith" always means "the act of believing the gospel". Further, we interpret justification by faith in terms of the assurance of salvation, not the application of redemption.


Rom 3:24 “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:”


Rom 5:9 “Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.”

Rom 5:1 “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:”


James 2:24 “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

 

…Like Smoked beer from Bremen

 

@Earth Wind and Fire

You should cite your source. You don’t want to come across as plagiarizing, do you?

 

No… taken from
Ten Reasons Primitive Baptists Are Not Calvinists

By Elders Michael Gowens and Lonnie Mozingo, Jr.

 

Now I’m confused… don’t we already know this as New Testament Christian’s? I view myself as more a reborn child of God which should eliminate all this nonsense. To be blunt, what is the purpose of identifying as a NCT adherent if not to inflame others who are already practicing NT principles?

 

Please adjust (last sentence): NTC … should be NCT

 

I'm confused too. Does this come down to "What is the Law for?" when it comes to New Testament Christianity? They have been arguing about that since the Puritans and really, even in the book of Galatians. I know Robert Traill wrote a classic on justification and said that he was tired of being called an antinomian because he believe in justification by faith alone. Then he said as long as you believed that the Law was still a "rule of life" you were not antinomian. So do the New Covenant Theology people believe the Law is NOT a rule of life? And if they do, and instead they believe the teachings of Christ are followed as a rule of life, well that doesn't seem so bad to me. "All things whatsoever ye would that men would do to you, do ye also unto them. For this is the Law and the Prophets".

Also, are there churches that teach this in an identifiable way, by naming it, or do you have to figure out what a pastor believes in this area by how they handle the Law and so on?

 

I haven't meant to get involved with these multiple threads on NCT, but I will try to shed a bit of light if I can.
Firstly, my support of the term "Nothing Burger" was directed at the use of the term "Christocentric Theology," which seemed, and still seems to me, to be more of an advertising slogan than anything else. I have never heard of the term before applied to NCT.
New Covenant Theology I came across shortly after its inception, maybe 25 years ago. I am more acquainted with John Reisinger' book Tablets of Stone, than any other book. NCT is not the worst theology in the world, but I believe it falls short in its view of the O.T. law. All Bible-based churches have to steer, Like Odysseus, between the Scylla of Legalism and the Charybdis of Antinomianism. I believe that Covenant Theology is the best way to do that. NCT, as I understand it, holds that all OT law is abolished except that which reappears in the NT. Yet all of the 10 Commandments can be found in the Bible before the giving of the Law of Moses in Exodus 20.
To say that the 1644 Baptist Confession was NCT is incorrect Actually the 1644 was found to have faults in it and was quickly supplanted by the enlarged and corrected 1646 Confession. 1646 London Baptist Confession of Faith | The Reformed Reader The only two signatories of the 1646 Confession who survived until 1689 were William Kiffin and Hansard Knollys. They both signed up to the 1689 Confession. Moreover, all the men who wrote and signed the 1644/1646 confessions were covenant theologians as evidenced in their books. They would hardly have signed up to something they didn't believe.
Lastly, the whole purpose of the 1644 confession was to establish that the Baptist churches was to show that they were not Anabaptists, but held to fully Reformed principles. The Confession begins:
'A confession of faith of seven congregations or churches of Christ in London, which are commonly, but unjustly called Anabaptists; published for the vindication of the truth and information of the ignorant; likewise for the taking off those aspersions which are frequently, both in pulpit and print, unjustly cast upon them. Printed at London, Anno 1646.'

The 1644/46 confession contain meaty chunks from two older paedobaptist confessions: the 1596 True Confession of a Separatist church exiled in Holland, and The Marrow of Sacred Divinity produced by William Ames, another Separatist and one of the originators of Covenant Theology. One last thing about the 1644/1646 confessions: they contain an equally robust Calvinism as does the 1689.
eg, Art. III. God had decreed in Himself, before the world was, concerning all things, whether necessary, accidental or voluntary, with all the circumstances of them, to work, dispose, and bring about all things according to the counsel of His own will, to His glory: (Yet without being the author of sin, or having fellowship with any therein) in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, unchangeableness, power, and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree: And God hath before the foundation of the world, foreordained some men to eternal life, through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace; leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice. Isa. 46:10; Eph. 1:11, Rom. 11:33, Ps. 115:3; 135:6, 33:15; 1 Sam. 10:9, 26, Prov. 21:6; Exod. 21:13; Prov. 16:33, Ps. 144, Isa. 45:7, Jer. 14:22, Matt. 6:28, 30; Col. 1:16, 17; Num. 23:19, 20; Rom. 3:4; Jer. 10:10; Eph. 1:4,5; Jude 4, 6; Prov. 16:4.

V. God in His infinite power and wisdom, doth dispose all things to the end for which they were created; that neither good nor evil befalls any by chance, or without His providence; and that whatsoever befalls the elect, is by His appointment, for His glory, and their good. Job 38:11; Isa. 46:10,11, Eccles. 3:14, Mark 10:29,30; Exod. 21:13; Prov. 16:33, Rom. 8:28.

VI. All the elect being loved of God with an everlasting love, are redeemed, quickened, and saved, not by themselves, nor their own works, lest any man should boast, but, only and wholly by God, of His own free grace and mercy, through Jesus Christ, who is made unto us by God, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, and all in all, that he that rejoiceth, might rejoice in the Lord. Jer. 31:2; Eph. 1:3, 7, 2:8,9; 1 Thess. 5:9, Acts 13:48; 2 Cor. 5:21; Jer. 9:23,24; 1 Cor. 1:30,31; Jer. 23:6.

I realise that I may have prompted more questions than I've answered, but this is all I have time for. And as I have a short holiday next week, followed by a Prayer meeting to lead and a sermon to give, followed by going into hospital to receive a shiny new titanium hip, I don't know when I shall be back here.

 

Well articulated questions Dave

 

Just very quickly, Covenant Theology takes the whole of the Bible as God's eternal word and therefore says "Don't lust" as well as "don't commit adultery."
But I will make a further post in due course as requested; I just don't know when.

 

So if I were a hired assassin and killed someone purely for money without even knowing him, much less hating him, would that be OK under NCT? You are being silly.