Covenant vs. Dispensational vs. New Covenant theology

[dwmoeller1]

Am new to this board. I tried searching for the topic but was unable to find this particular discussion. I apologize beforehand if this is an 'old' topic (although it looks like with as many times Calvinism has been rehashed it shouldn't be a big deal if it is )

Let me just introduce the discussion this way...
I am curious as to the general breakdown of people's view regarding Biblical covenants and God's plan/purpose in history. Who would classify themselvs as dispensationalist? Covenanters? New Covenanters? Other (if so, what)?

Or is it something you have never really studied and thus aren't sure what you are?

If you chose one particular category, can you give the reason(s) (ie. Scripture and logic) for taking your particular position and/or rejecting the other positions?


Also, as a side question (maybe to become a different thread)...If you consider yourself within the Covenant theology camp (enough Cists here that I figure this a likelihood ) how do you argue for credobaptism within the CT framework?

 

[~JM~]

Could we include Modified Covenant Theology/MCT I'm interested in what others think of this modified system.

Peace,

j

 

[dwmoeller1]

Could we include Modified Covenant Theology/MCT I'm interested in what others think of this modified system.

Peace,

j

It appears that he doesn't really understand CT and/or NCT and consequently doesn't understand their distinctives.

But it is interesting. However, I would question the need for keeping the concept of the 'covenant of grace' if one is not going to include the Mosaic as part of it.

 

[~JM~]

It appears that he doesn't really understand CT and/or NCT and consequently doesn't understand their distinctives.

But it is interesting. However, I would question the need for keeping the concept of the 'covenant of grace' if one is not going to include the Mosaic as part of it.

Go on...

:1_grouphug:

 

[dwmoeller1]

Well a main tenant of CT (if I understand correctly) is that the covenant of grace is how God deals with *all* His people throughout *all* history. The covenant of grace is THE overarching theme and reality of redemptive history. It seems that this writer has to deny this, what seems to me, essential aspect of the covenant of grace thus doing away with the need for the concept.

In fact, later on he seems to do just that. The new covenant is no longer a different administration of the overarching covenant of grace as it is in CT, but instead he makes the new covenant into the covenant of grace and extends it backwards in time.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Yeah, the more I read the site, the more I think he is simply confused about both positions. He starts with mostly CT presuppositions but sees the difficulties those presuppositions created in some areas. He would do better, I think, to question the presuppositions and then start over.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Here's what I found in a link in a friend's website. I am breaking it down into several posts for easier reading.

C. NCT Described
New Covenant Theology is a developing system of theology that provides a more biblical way to interpret the Scriptures by questioning key theological presuppositions which undergird the hermeneutics (principles of interpretation) of CT and DT.

NCT is based upon a redemptive history approach to understanding the fulfillment of God’s eternal kingdom purpose on earth. Its principles of interpretation are based upon a biblical theology that stresses the theology of the Bible itself, especially upon the NT understanding of the OT.

NCT challenges the basic theological presuppositions of the one Covenant of Grace system of Covenant Theology, including its understanding of the “moral law” of God and the nature of the Church. NCT also challenges the two redemptive purposes of Dispensational Theology, one for the Church and one for Israel, and it challenges some of DT’s presuppositions and literal hermeneutic for understanding key elements of Bible prophecy.

The driving motive of NCT is “back to the Bible.” NCT emphasizes the inductive study of the Bible. A major objective of NCT is that its hermeneutic will help bring doctrinal unity in this sin-wrecked world by breaking down the middle walls of doctrinal partition that exist within the theological systems of Covenant Theology and Dispensational Theology.

 

[pinoybaptist]

New Covenant Theology

LINK HERE by Gary D. Long
Gary D. Long is the Faculty President of Providence Theological Institute located in Belton, Texas. Providence Theological Institute’s website is www.ptitx.org.

D. NCT Characteristics
The following lists some of the major NCT characteristics.
NCT teaches that:
1.The discernment of the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential for accurately handling the Word of God (I Cor. 2:13-14; II Tim. 2:15) and that the most important principle of interpretation is “contextual exegesis.” Contextual biblical exegesis demands grammatical/historical/theological principles of interpretation.

2.The imputation of Adam’s first sin to all mankind (Rom. 5:12d, 18a-19a), the elects’ sins to Christ (II Cor. 5:21), and Christ’s righteousness to the elect (Rom. 5:18b-19b) are vital for the Christian faith. Without the doctrine of imputation the whole doctrine of the substitutionary atonement and justification by faith alone in Christ alone are undermined (Rom. 5:12-19).

3.God’s plan of salvation is revealed and administered through the unfolding of biblical covenants in the flow of redemptive history, not through the theologically deduced system of CT’s Covenant of Works/Covenant of Grace/Covenant of Redemption schema.

4.The Law of God is both absolute and covenantal (Matt. 5:17-20). God’s “absolute law” is innate, written on the heart of man created in the image of God. It is God’s unchanging standard of righteousness. God’s “covenantal law,” however, is written and changeable according to the covenant being administered.

5.The love of God and the love of neighbor are the two greatest commandments (Matt. 22:36-40) upon which the whole Law and the Prophets hang. This means that the Ten Commandments, the Decalogue, hang upon these two greatest commandments, not the reverse as CT teaches.

 

[pinoybaptist]

New Covenant Theology

by Gary D. Long

Gary D. Long is the Faculty President of Providence Theological Institute located in Belton, Texas. Providence Theological Institute’s website is www.ptitx.org.

6.The Ten Commandments are a covenantal outworking of the two greatest commandments in redemptive history not the reverse. They were given through the hand of Moses to the nation of Israel first at Mount Sinai (Exod. 20).

7.The Fourth Commandment, the Sabbath commandment, being the sign of the Mosaic Covenant (Exod. 31:15-17), is not a creation ordinance as taught by CT.

8.The Ten Commandments are not eternal moral law first written in the heart of man at creation and forever binding upon all mankind as CT teaches in its confessions of faith e.g., the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647-1649) and the Second London Baptist Confession (1689). In fact, the term “moral law” does not occur in the Bible. Although under any given covenantal administration, man is morally obligated to obey all of God’s commandments, yet the Bible does not separate God’s law into three parts: moral, ceremonial and civil. Historically, this threefold separation was not substantially taught until the time of Thomas Aquinas in the 13 th century and in the 16 th century by Calvin.

9.The Decalogue is not “transcovenantal” and, therefore, does not function outside the Old Covenant as a unit as much of CT teaches.

10.Christ came not to destroy the OT Scriptures but to fulfill them, which includes the Decalogue. The New Covenant law is called the law of Christ which is distinguished from Mosaic law and from the Gentiles who do not have a written revelation of God’s law (I Cor. 9:20-21

 

[pinoybaptist]

New Covenant Theology

by Gary D. Long

Gary D. Long is the Faculty President of Providence Theological Institute located in Belton, Texas. Providence Theological Institute’s website is www.ptitx.org.

11.The law of Christ is not to be equated with the Decalogue. Although the law of Christ, the law of the NC people of God, is related to the Decalogue in that it incorporates nine of the Ten Commandments. The law of Christ is a better law than the law of Moses (Matt. 5:21-48; Heb. 7:19) in the sense that (1) it is a higher revelation of the righteousness of God (Matt: 5:20); (2) it is based upon a higher standard of love (Matt. 5:44); and, (3) Christ’s inauguration of the New Covenant brings in things that are qualitatively “newer,” expressed in developing the theological significance of such basic concepts as new wineskins, new teaching, new commandment, new creation, new man, new name, new song, new Jerusalem and all things new (Rev. 21:5).

12.The OC Sabbath commandment is typologically fulfilled by Christ for the people of God who rest in Him by faith (Heb. 4:9-10).

13.New Covenant believers are in-lawed to Christ; they are not under the OC law of Moses but under the grace of the NC (Rom. 6:14). NCT does not equate the law of Christ with the Decalogue as do many holding to CT.


14.The indwelling Holy Spirit is the norm for Christian living. NCT does not teach that the Ten Commandments are the only objective standard for evaluating the Christian life. Rather, NCT emphasizes that it is the Spirit who enables the Christian to have a godly walk (Rom. 8:4; Gal. 5:16-18).

15.Christ merited righteousness for the elect only and that it is imputed to them based upon His total obedience to the will of the Father in His life and death (Matt. 3:15; Rom. 5:19).

 

[pinoybaptist]

New Covenant Theology

by Gary D. Long

Gary D. Long is the Faculty President of Providence Theological Institute located in Belton, Texas. Providence Theological Institute’s website is www.ptitx.org.

16. The Church, which is the body of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18), was first formed in history when the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost not in past history under the OC. Most holding to CT see the Church existing in the OT before Pentecost. NCT does not. Contrary to DT, NCT sees only one redemptive purpose for the people of God, which is the Church, the good olive tree (Rom. 11), the body of Christ (Eph. 2:13-22; 3:1-12).

17. The ordinance of water baptism is the pledge of membership in the New Covenant for believers alone and the sign of the New Covenant is not baptism, rather the sign is the cup, which memorializes the New Covenant in Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20; I Cor. 11:25).

18. The “now-not yet” principle of interpretation is essential to understand the teaching of the NT. The Christian experiences the commencement of “every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ” (Eph. 1:3), yet he stills awaits the consummation of these blessings at Christ’s return. The End has come! The End has not come! The whole theology of the NT is qualified by this tension: between the “already” or “now” and the “not yet” (I John 3:2).

19. The “recapitulation” principle is essential to understand the NT prophetic Scriptures (Matt. 24:4-14 and 24:15-31; Rev. 11:15—12).

20. The “blessed hope” will occur when Christ returns (Titus 2:13) to earth bodily and visibly (Acts 1:11) at the Second Advent to resurrect, judge and consign the saved to heaven and the lost to a Christless eternity (John 5:28-29).

 

[Andy T.]

My views are close to what is sometimes called "progressive dispensationalism." I am post-trib on the timing of the rapture.

 

[skypair]

pinoy,

Thanks for those illuminating posts.

I think after reading them, though, that they are rather a "compromise" much as midtrib or prewrath rapture theogies are a compromise of actual biblical resurrections -- one to heaven pretrib for the church and one postrib to earth for the OT saints.

Also lacking for me is the comment on the imputation of Adam's sin. I may be misuderstanding him but we got the "sin nature" from Adam, not sin guilt.

Much of the rest sounds like "postdating" one's check. I agree with many of his disputes with CT. There are patently more than one covenant in operation. All who don't come into the new covenant are still under the old, for instance.

skypair

 

[dwmoeller1]

pinoy,

Thanks for those illuminating posts.

I think after reading them, though, that they are rather a "compromise" much as midtrib or prewrath rapture theogies are a compromise of actual biblical resurrections -- one to heaven pretrib for the church and one postrib to earth for the OT saints.

Read further and you will find NCT is definitely not a compromise. NCTs start out with basic suppositions and a framework which is unique from both the Dispensationalist and Covenant views. If they happen to trod the 'middle road' between the two opposing views, it is not because of their desire to reconcile or compromise between the two opposing views. They would say that the reason NCT treads the middle ground is because the other two opposing views have wrong suppositions and thus fall to the extremes.

Whether they are accurate in this is a subject for discussion, but lets be clear that they are not a compromise position.

Also lacking for me is the comment on the imputation of Adam's sin. I may be misuderstanding him but we got the "sin nature" from Adam, not sin guilt.

He would probably hold that we received both imputed sin (ie. sin guilt) and sin nature from Adam, just as we receive imputed righteous and a righteous nature from Christ. The emphasis in point is not a denial of sin nature but an emphasis on imputed guilt.

Much of the rest sounds like "postdating" one's check. I agree with many of his disputes with CT. There are patently more than one covenant in operation. All who don't come into the new covenant are still under the old, for instance.

So how would you classify yourself and why?

 

[dwmoeller1]

My views are close to what is sometimes called "progressive dispensationalism." I am post-trib on the timing of the rapture.

Why progressive dispensationalism?

I almost included PD in the list but, as far as I can tell, its not really a unique position like the other three. Maybe you can comment on that as well.

 

[skypair]

dw...

...

This is the "compromise" I was seeing: "A major objective of NCT is that its hermeneutic will help bring doctrinal unity in this sin-wrecked world by breaking down the middle walls of doctrinal partition that exist within the theological systems of Covenant Theology and Dispensational Theology." I took that to mean that they were trying to reach some middle ground where doctrinal walls now stood.

I'm a firmly grounded dispie.

skypair

 

[dwmoeller1]

...

This is the "compromise" I was seeing: "A major objective of NCT is that its hermeneutic will help bring doctrinal unity in this sin-wrecked world by breaking down the middle walls of doctrinal partition that exist within the theological systems of Covenant Theology and Dispensational Theology." I took that to mean that they were trying to reach some middle ground where doctrinal walls now stood.

Compromise is finding what is common and working from there to create unity. Instead they see walls which prevent unity and seek to break down those walls. Compromise seeks to find unity within disunity - they seek to create unity by starting from a totally new set of suppositions.

I'm a firmly grounded dispie.

Why?

 

[skypair]

Compromise is finding what is common and working from there to create unity. Instead they see walls which prevent unity and seek to break down those walls. Compromise seeks to find unity within disunity - they seek to create unity by starting from a totally new set of suppositions.

Well, I've been trying to break down walls and bring unity between free will and Calvinism for some time now over the following misunderstandings:

Belief vs. faith

Foreknow vs predestination

justification vs sanctification

soul vs spirit

They really are right about sanctification but wrong about justification and where it belongs in theology.

Why [dispie]?

There are obviously 2 dispensations at least -- Israel and the church. Two "husbands" -- OT and NT, Rom 7:3-4. To miss that and say one covenant (CT) is another fault I find with Calvinists/Reformers. They, indeed, have to make up a covenant that is NEVER mentioned in scriptures and deny the meaning of or ignore all the ones that ARE mentioned!

There is only one way -- faith. But that faith was centered in 2 very different things -- God and Christ. Now that is not to say that the OT saints won't have to come by Way of Christ; they will -- but not till the MK.

skypair

 

[Mel Miller]

Dispensational vs. NCT

Skypair,

Statments like the following, without Scriptural support, are so misleading
that they should be exposed whenever you make them a basis for seeking
to solve the rift between the NCT and the unfounded doctrine that OT
Saints "don't take part in God's plans until the Millennial Kingdom":

"There is only one way -- faith. But that faith was centered in 2 very different things -- God and Christ. Now that is not to say OT saints won't have to come by Way of Christ; they will -- but not till the MK".

Mel Miller