Covenant Theology

[Van]

Thread summary, Covenant Theology is a mistaken view of scripture based on speculative rationalism. Theologians invented an unscriptural plan of redemption and then claimed the whole bible supports the fiction.

God reveals He planned before creation for redemption because the Lamb of God was known before the foundation of the world. When God chose the Word to be His Redeemer, in effect He corporately chose those His Redeemer would redeem, therefore He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world.

God did make a conditional covenant with Adam, saying eat everything that grows in the garden except from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or on that day you will surely die. As a consequence, when Adam sinned of his own volition, all mankind was made sinners, separated from God.

From fallen Adam to Abraham, God dealt with mankind under the dispensation of conscience, where people piled up wrath doing what they knew was wrong, but a few found favor in the eyes of God, such as Noah.

With Abraham, God promised to bless his descendants, i.e. those of faith, but not based on bloodline, and Jesus fulfilled that promise. Anyone redeemed by Jesus becomes a child of the promise, regardless of blood line.

National Israel, referring to a group identified by bloodline or geographic location is a fiction, for all Israel refers to children of the promise, believers chosen individually by God and set apart in Christ.

The millennial kingdom will occur on earth with Jesus on the throne of David.

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

Baptist Covenant Theology?

Hello,

I do not frequent the board as much as I used to, but I thought I would share a link to my book Waters of Promise: Finding Meaning in Believer Baptism. In my book, I build on scholarship about historical Baptist modifications to covenant theology. Some of you interested in the subject may find my study helpful.

Here's the link to the publisher's Web site: https://wipfandstock.com/store/Waters_of_Promise_Finding_Meaning_in_Believer_Baptism

Blessings,
Brandon

 

[thomas15]

Thread summary, Covenant Theology is a mistaken view of scripture based on speculative rationalism. ......... forget what I just said .......God did make a conditional covenant with Adam, saying eat everything that grows in the garden except from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or on that day you will surely die. As a consequence, when Adam sinned of his own volition, all mankind was made sinners, separated from God.

To summarize your summary, you appear to like almost everything about covnenant theology except the term covenant theology.

 

[OldRegular]

It would help if you tell what you mean by "speculative rationalism".

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

It would help if you tell what you mean by "speculative rationalism".

Oh come on OR....you going to encourage him now!?!

 

[12strings]

Jesus was foreknown before the foundation of the world as the Lamb of God. Thus the redeeming work of the Lamb was planned for before the Fall. Anyone who says Christ is not the Chosen One simply nullifies scripture for the sake of man-made doctrine.

WAIT, WAIT, WAIT!!!!

Didn't we have huge threads a couple of months ago in which you said God does not know the future actions of his free creatures (ie sins), because if he did then it means he determined them????

How then, did God plan the redeeming work of the Lamb before the fall?

 

[Yeshua1]

It would help if you tell what you mean by "speculative rationalism".

Would you say that God had determined that Jesus would come to die for the sins of those to be saved by Him before the all, or that he did it in response to seeing the fall, as he did not know of it until it happened!

 

[Alive in Christ]

Well, I'm coming in kinda late in the thread, and I havent read anything, but here goes.

I dont know anything about the intracacies and complexeties of covenant theology...but I am ((FIRMLY)) convinced of this...


There is an Old covenant.

There is a New covenant.

The two are NEVER to be mixed.

And we are currantly living under the New Covenant. not the old.

(And before anyone gets all out of sorts, no, I do not believe that we discard the Old testamant.)

 

[Yeshua1]

Well, I'm coming in kinda late in the thread, and I havent read anything, but here goes.

I dont know anything about the intracacies and complexeties of covenant theology...but I am ((FIRMLY)) convinced of this...


There is an Old covenant.

There is a New covenant.

The two are NEVER to be mixed.

And we are currantly living under the New Covenant. not the old.

(And before anyone gets all out of sorts, no, I do not believe that we discard the Old testamant.)

not discard, but how much of it applies still to us today though?

 

[Alive in Christ]

not discard, but how much of it applies still to us today though?

Hmmm.

Generally I would advocate that anything profitable (doctrinally) from the old covenant scriptures can be used, so long as there is no contradiction of the new covenant scriptures.

If there is a contradiction, we should go strictly with the new covenant scriptures.

 

[Yeshua1]

Hmmm.

Generally I would advocate that anything profitable (doctrinally) from the old covenant scriptures can be used, so long as there is no contradiction of the new covenant scriptures.

If there is a contradiction, we should go strictly with the new covenant scriptures.

see the old testament as having very useful principles and examples of giod dealings with us...

 

[Alive in Christ]

see the old testament as having very useful principles and examples of god dealings with us...

I agree with that.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Here is something that I came across the I believe is pretty good regarding this topic....


•Old Covenant – Moses as Minister (2 Corinthians 3:13-15; John 1:17; Hebrews 3:5)

•New Covenant - Jesus’ Disciples as Ministers (2 Corinthians 3:6; John 16:12-15)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant of the Letter (2 Corinthians 3:6)

•New Covenant - A Covenant of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:6-8)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant which Kills (2 Corinthians 3:6)

•New Covenant - A Covenant which Gives Life (2 Corinthians 3:6 – literally “makes alive”)

•Old Covenant - A Ministry of Death (2 Corinthians 3:7)

•New Covenant - A Ministry of Life (2 Corinthians 3:6)

•Old Covenant - A Ministry of Condemnation (2 Corinthians 3:9)

•New Covenant - A Ministration of Righteousness (2 Corinthians 3:9)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant Written with Ink (2 Corinthians 3:3)

•New Covenant - A Covenant Written with the Spirit of the Living God (2 Corinthians 3:3)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant Written on Stone (2 Corinthians 3:3-7)

•New Covenant - A Covenant Written on the Heart of Man (2 Corinthians 3:3; Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 11:19-20; 36:26)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant which came with Glory (2 Corinthians 3:7; Exodus 34:29-35)

•New Covenant - A Covenant which came with the Greatest Glory (2 Corinthians 3:8-11)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant whose Glory was Passing/Fading (2 Corinthians 3:7)

•New Covenant - A Covenant whose Glory Continues to Shine (2 Corinthians 3:18)

•Old Covenant - A Veiled or Covered Glory (2 Corinthians 3:12-16)

•New Covenant - An Unveiled, Ever-Increasing Glory (2 Corinthians 3:18)

•Old Covenant - A Covenant Destined to be Done Away (2 Corinthians 3:11; Hebrews 7:12, 8:13, 10:9)

•New Covenant - A Covenant Destined to Last Forever (2 Corinthians 3:11; Hebrews 13:20)

 

[33ad]

Scott Hahn is probably the best known modern theologian on this topic

 

[Van]

Pitchback

WAIT, WAIT, WAIT!!!!

Didn't we have huge threads a couple of months ago in which you said God does not know the future actions of his free creatures (ie sins), because if he did then it means he determined them????

How then, did God plan the redeeming work of the Lamb before the fall?

Here is an example of the inability to understand truth when viewed through the prism of falsehood.

1) Did I say God does not know the future actions of individuals? Nope. I said God could choose not to know with certainty what we will choose autonomously. Strike One.

2) Yes, I accept the idea of Calvinists that if God knows with certainty what we will choose to do, that choice is predestined. Note that many Arminians reject this view and say that through some mystery, God can know what we will choose yet that does not predestine our choice.

3) Did I say God planned the redeeming work of the Lamb, meaning selection of individuals to redeem, before creation? Nope. Strike two. I said God formulated His plan of redemption which included choosing those who autonomously trust in Christ. Thus those to be redeemed were chosen corporately, i.e. the target group of the redemption plan, before creation, but only during our lives, after we have lived without mercy, are we individually chosen and placed spiritually in Christ through faith in the truth, 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

12 Strings, I have presented my view in detail, please stop misrepresenting what I said over and over. Lets take Peter being sifted by Satan. What did Jesus say? Did He know Peter would fail? Of course. Why do you continue to misrepresent my positions with those that are unbiblical?

You failed to understand my view that our faith provides our access to God's grace, but does not merit it. Until you come to your senses and at least see that is the biblical view, there seems no way to reach you. Van

 

[12strings]

1) Did I say God does not know the future actions of individuals? Nope. I said God could choose not to know with certainty what we will choose autonomously. Strike One.

What's the difference? Is the difference that God chose not to know for certain if Adam would fall, but prepared a Lamb anyway?

2) Yes, I accept the idea of Calvinists that if God knows with certainty what we will choose to do, that choice is predestined. Note that many Arminians reject this view and say that through some mystery, God can know what we will choose yet that does not predestine our choice.

I realize this, which is why I'm asking these questions.

3) Did I say God planned the redeeming work of the Lamb, meaning selection of individuals to redeem, before creation? Nope. Strike two.

I dont' know what this #3 point is about...I said nothing about selecting individuals. I simply want to know if you think God caused the fall?

12 Strings, I have presented my view in detail, please stop misrepresenting what I said over and over. Lets take Peter being sifted by Satan. What did Jesus say? Did He know Peter would fail? Of course. Why do you continue to misrepresent my positions with those that are unbiblical?

So again, did God predetermine Peter's sin? If so (according to your #2 above) how does this not make God the author of that sin?
I'm not trying to misrepresent your views, simply trying to reconcile what I see as parts that don't seem to fit together.

You failed to understand my view that our faith provides our access to God's grace, but does not merit it. Until you come to your senses and at least see that is the biblical view, there seems no way to reach you. Van

I agree totally with your statement here.

 

[Van]

The difference is:

"Didn't we have huge threads a couple of months ago in which you said God does not know the future actions of his free creatures (ie sins), because if he did then it means he determined them????"

You claimed I said God does not know the future actions of individuals, i.e. sins. He can choose to know they will sin, predestining those sins in the perfection of His knowledge. Jesus knew Peter would sin, i.e. do things that would earn wrath if not covered by God's grace.

We have been over this ground before. If God causes a person to sin, He may not punish that person for his or her "non-volitional" i.e. predestined sin. We know that God is just and this seems just to me, but it certainly is based on speculative rationalism.

Yes, God did not cause Adam to sin, but He did arrange the fall, so I agree with Pink on his assessment. The fall was part of God predetermined plan, but, and this is key, the plan was to allow Adam to volitionally sin, not compel him to do so. God provided the opportunity, i.e. tree in the garden, but He allowed Adam to choose to eat the fruit. Therefore, it is consistent with my understanding of God's justice to punish Adam for his volitional sin. And as a consequence of that just punishment the many were made sinners.

Next you referred to the "redeeming work of the Lamb" but perhaps did not mean that the phrase refers to our individual redemption. I read it as meaning our individual redemption. I certainly did not read it as asking the question did God cause the fall. The answer is God arranged the fall, but did not compel or predestine Adam choosing to sin.

Calvinism as you know does consider the "redeeming work of the Lamb" to be the redemption of elect individuals chosen before creation.
I expect you cannot say you disagree.

Lastly you do not agree with the last statement if you agree with Calvinism. Calvinism says we are saved by grace and given faith, so our faith does not provide our access to God's grace.

 

[12strings]

The difference is:

"Didn't we have huge threads a couple of months ago in which you said God does not know the future actions of his free creatures (ie sins), because if he did then it means he determined them????"

You claimed I said God does not know the future actions of individuals, i.e. sins. He can choose to know they will sin, predestining those sins in the perfection of His knowledge. Jesus knew Peter would sin, i.e. do things that would earn wrath if not covered by God's grace.

We have been over this ground before. If God causes a person to sin, He may not punish that person for his or her "non-volitional" i.e. predestined sin. We know that God is just and this seems just to me, but it certainly is based on speculative rationalism.

Yes, God did not cause Adam to sin, but He did arrange the fall, so I agree with Pink on his assessment. The fall was part of God predetermined plan, but, and this is key, the plan was to allow Adam to volitionally sin, not compel him to do so. God provided the opportunity, i.e. tree in the garden, but He allowed Adam to choose to eat the fruit. Therefore, it is consistent with my understanding of God's justice to punish Adam for his volitional sin. And as a consequence of that just punishment the many were made sinners.

So you would say God did not know FOR SURE that Adam would sin? Becuase if he knew for sure, the that would mean he determined/caused it?
...Just that he very likely would? ...and based on this very likely scenario, he prepared the Lamb?

Next you referred to the "redeeming work of the Lamb" but perhaps did not mean that the phrase refers to our individual redemption. I read it as meaning our individual redemption. I certainly did not read it as asking the question did God cause the fall. The answer is God arranged the fall, but did not compel or predestine Adam choosing to sin.

Calvinism as you know does consider the "redeeming work of the Lamb" to be the redemption of elect individuals chosen before creation.
I expect you cannot say you disagree.

I would say redemption of elect individuals would be one aspect of the "redeeming work of the lamb." But not necessarily implied every time the phrase is used. I was basically just refering to Jesus Death on the cross...and how it was planned for if God did not also plan the fall.

Lastly you do not agree with the last statement if you agree with Calvinism. Calvinism says we are saved by grace and given faith, so our faith does not provide our access to God's grace.

[/QUOTE]

I can agree with it, in that "OUR" faith comes from God, and that faith is how we receive the righteousness of Christ.

 

[Yeshua1]

The difference is:

"Didn't we have huge threads a couple of months ago in which you said God does not know the future actions of his free creatures (ie sins), because if he did then it means he determined them????"

You claimed I said God does not know the future actions of individuals, i.e. sins. He can choose to know they will sin, predestining those sins in the perfection of His knowledge. Jesus knew Peter would sin, i.e. do things that would earn wrath if not covered by God's grace.

We have been over this ground before. If God causes a person to sin, He may not punish that person for his or her "non-volitional" i.e. predestined sin. We know that God is just and this seems just to me, but it certainly is based on speculative rationalism.

Yes, God did not cause Adam to sin, but He did arrange the fall, so I agree with Pink on his assessment. The fall was part of God predetermined plan, but, and this is key, the plan was to allow Adam to volitionally sin, not compel him to do so. God provided the opportunity, i.e. tree in the garden, but He allowed Adam to choose to eat the fruit. Therefore, it is consistent with my understanding of God's justice to punish Adam for his volitional sin. And as a consequence of that just punishment the many were made sinners.

Next you referred to the "redeeming work of the Lamb" but perhaps did not mean that the phrase refers to our individual redemption. I read it as meaning our individual redemption. I certainly did not read it as asking the question did God cause the fall. The answer is God arranged the fall, but did not compel or predestine Adam choosing to sin.

Calvinism as you know does consider the "redeeming work of the Lamb" to be the redemption of elect individuals chosen before creation.
I expect you cannot say you disagree.

Lastly you do not agree with the last statement if you agree with Calvinism. Calvinism says we are saved by grace and given faith, so our faith does not provide our access to God's grace.

Did God have ordained the Cross before or after the fall though happened?

 

[thomas15]

The problem Alive in Christ with your new covenant/old covenant rant with bullet points is that it doesn't understand what the new covenant is, who it is for and what it's purpose is.