Is "NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY" Valid?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Is "NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY" Valid & in keeping with orthodox theology?

I have a guy in the neighborhood who runs a church that is NCT, but I see some discord with not everyone accepting it....your thoughts are appreciated.

 

[steaver]

Is "NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY" Valid & in keeping with orthodox theology?

I have a guy in the neighborhood who runs a church that is NCT, but I see some discord with not everyone accepting it....your thoughts are appreciated.

Is this "NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY" some new tag for some new doctrine being espoused? I ask because I see the New Covenant clearly spelled out in the Scriptures. Are people putting a new spin on it or what?

 

[glfredrick]

You will have to flesh that out some...

Here is a brief overview of Covenant Theology (from Theopedia):

Covenant Theology (or Federal theology) is a prominent feature in Protestant theology, especially in the Presbyterian and Reformed churches, and a similar form is found in Methodism and Reformed Baptist churches. This article primarily concerns Covenant Theology as held by the Presbyterian and Reformed churches, which use the covenant concept as an organizing principle for Christian theology and view the history of redemption under the framework of three overarching theological covenants: the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace. These three are called “theological covenants” because although not explicitly presented as covenants, they are, according to covenant theologians, implicit in the Bible.

In brief, Covenant Theology teaches that God has established two great covenants with mankind and a covenant within the Godhead to deal with how the other two relate. The first covenant in logical order, usually called the Covenant of Redemption, is the agreement within the Godhead that the Father would appoint his son Jesus to give up his life for mankind and that Jesus would do so (cf. Titus 1:1–3).

The second, called the Covenant of Works, was made in the Garden of Eden between God and Adam and promised life for obedience and death for disobedience. Adam disobeyed God and broke the covenant, and so the third covenant was made between God and all of mankind, who also fell with Adam according to Romans 5:12–21.

This third covenant, the Covenant of Grace, promised eternal blessing for belief in Christ and obedience to God’s word. It is thus seen as the basis for all biblical covenants that God made individually with Noah, Abraham, and David, nationally with O.T. Israel as a people, and universally with man in the New Covenant. These individual covenants are called the “biblical covenants” because they are explicitly described as such in the Bible.

Covenant theology as a refinement of Reformed theology is evident among early Scottish theologians. For example, see The Theology and Theologians of Scotland, Chiefly of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (1872) passage: “The old theology of Scotland might be emphatically described as a covenant theology.”[1]

The fatal flaw with this view is that no where in the Bible does it say that God established two covenants with humanity, one of redemption and one of works, which when broken instituted another covenant of grace. All those points are assumed but not directly Scriptural.

Additionally, Covenantal Theology does not wrap around the covenants in Scripture the way that many think it does. It is about the three (non) covenants listed above, with the actual covenants found in the Word under the Covenant of Grace.

And lest the dispensationalists get all happy and figure that their system wins by default, neither does the Bible mention dispensations of time for this or that, nor does it make the church to be a "parenthesis" in the history of Israel.

Both systems have fatal flaws.

Here is the overview of New Covenantal Theology:

New Covenant Theology is a technical term referring to a theological view of redemptive history primarily found in Baptist circles and contrasted with Covenant theology and Dispensationalism. It has been assumed that one has only two primary options in understanding the structure of the Bible in evangelical Christianity — Covenant Theology (coming out of the Reformation) or Dispensationalism. However, proponents see what has come to be called New Covenant Theology as middle ground with a biblical basis of understanding.

Proponents maintain that the primary thrust of New Covenant Theology is the recognition of a promise-fulfillment understanding of Scripture. They suggest that whereas “Dispensationalism cannot get Israel and the church together in any sense whatsoever, and Covenant Theology cannot get them apart” (Reisinger, 19), New Covenant Theology finds the realization of all that the Old Covenant typified in the New Testament church (Covenant Theology, in contrast, merely levels the playing field and identifies them for all intents and purposes). The Mosaic economy is viewed as a temporal, conditional covenant that has been forever replaced by the glory of the New Covenant (2 Corinthians 3).

 

[Jerome]

They're Reformed Baptists who've wised up to some of the errant tenets of the sect:

Another Calvinistic Baptist group arose from within the self-designated Reformed Baptist movement and articulate a system they call New Covenant Theology. The New Covenant folks also adhere to the “five points,” but their hermeneutic is an effort to bridge the gap between traditional dispensational and covenant theologies. They tend to prefer the First London Confession over the Second London Confession, believing that the latter is too influenced by Reformed pedobaptism. Although they argue it is not the central tenet of their system, the New Covenant movement is probably best known for rejecting the Puritan view of the Lord’s Day, which is a reflection of their particular view of the role of the law under the new covenant.

http://www.nathanfinn.com/2010/07/13/can-baptists-be-reformed-part-2/

 

[Jerry Shugart]

And lest the dispensationalists get all happy and figure that their system wins by default, neither does the Bible mention dispensations of time for this or that, nor does it make the church to be a "parenthesis" in the history of Israel.

The parenthesis in the prophetic program is clearly seen here:

"and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things" (Eph.3:9).

 

[glfredrick]

The parenthesis in the prophetic program is clearly seen here:

"and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things" (Eph.3:9).

Hmmm... Wonder how that reads if we look it up in the Greek or see it in another translation.

καὶ φωτίσαι πάντας τίς ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ θεῷ τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι

and g2532 καί kai

to bring to light g5461 φωτίζω phōtizō

what g5101 τίς tis

is the administration g3622 οἰκονομία oikonomia

of the mystery g3466 μυστήριον mystērion

which for g575 ἀπό apo

ages g165 αἰών aiōn

has been hidden g613 ἀποκρύπτω apokryptō

in g1722 ἐν en

God g2316 θεός theos

who created g2936 κτίζω ktizō

all things; g3956 πᾶς pas


Hmmm, again... No word "dispensation" at all. Implied is "plan" which others translate as such:

Eph 3:9 (ESV) and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things...

Perhaps some further discovery is needed. What about the Latin Vulgate?

Eph 3:9 et inluminare omnes quae sit dispensatio sacramenti absconditi a saeculis in Deo qui omnia creavit

Ah, there we go... Dispensation is in the Latin version used by the Catholic Church... :wavey:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Hmmm... Wonder how that reads if we look it up in the Greek or see it in another translation.

is the administration g3622 οἰκονομία oikonomia

of the mystery g3466 μυστήριον mystērion

Yes, let us look at the same Greek word and see how it is translated in the KJV at another verse in the same chapter:

"If ye have heard of the dispensation (oikonomia) of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Eph.3:2).

The word means a "dispensation," specifically a "srweardship" or "administration."

 

[Darrell C]

Is "NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY" Valid & in keeping with orthodox theology?

I have a guy in the neighborhood who runs a church that is NCT, but I see some discord with not everyone accepting it....your thoughts are appreciated.

Hello EW&F, it would be very difficult to know what exactly this fellowship teaches concerning the New Covenant, and while there may be a general consensus in theology by a particular group, most of us recognize that usually a fellowship is led for the most part by what exactly is preached from the pulpit and taught in the sunday school room.

To think that "New Covenant Theology" is not in keeping with orthodox theology would demand w do not recognize what New Testament revelation has to say about the New Covenant in relation to Christ.

I will address a following post where I will give my views concerning the New Covenant as found in the New Testament.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Having read the overview of "New Covenant Theology," I have decided that I will simply post a few passages to consider, and ask if these apply to a sound theology, or, if it does not.


I have a basic view of the Covenants in scripture, of which, only one of which can be seen as an "if/then" Covenant, that being the Covenant of Law, or, Mosaic Covenant. I think it safe to say that every other Covenant that is recognized by most as a covenant are established apart from man's perticipation.

The most important of these being...the New Covenant, promised to Israel, and, I believe, enjoined by all that are in Christ.

Okay, a few verse to consider, but first:



A casual read through the verses here will show man's participation in the Covenants.


We see in several places why the law was given, and this should clear up man's involvement as a participant in this particular covenant. I would suggest, though, that all of the covenants, including the Covenant of Law, worked together without contradiction toward the goal that God had for man, which is, redemption.


During the time of the Covenant of Law, most are familiar that God promised a New Covenant, and this specifically to the House of Israel and the House of Judah. This leads some to the conclusion that this particular covenant was then only for them. That is not what Iconsider an unreasonable conclusion, but one, I believe, as the whole counsel of God's word is considered, will change.

In short, the New Covenant is a fulfilled promise in Christ. Unless we conclude that the New Covenant promised to Israel is just one of two, then it would seem reasonable to conclude that we see the New Covenant ushered in at Pentecost, ratified by the blood of Christ Himself.

Christ is promised to be a Savior to not just Israel, but to Gentiles as well:


Isaiah 42

1Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

2He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.

3A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.


Most are familiar with this passage, and few would deny it speaks of Christ. That is verified in the New Testament:



Matthew 12:17-21

King James Version (KJV)

17That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,

18Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.

19He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.

20A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.

21And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.



That Christ would benefit Gentiles was a truth foretold.

Now back to...


Isaiah 42

4He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.

5Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

6I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

7To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.


It would seem that Christ would be given for a covenant of the people, and for a light of the Gentiles.



Would we distinguish between Jews and Gentiles and say He will be a covenant for the Jew, and only a light for the Gentiles? Or would we see this as reference to the ministry of Christ...to the world.


Okay, as I said, just a few verses, this one from the Old Testament, and now one, or two maybe, from the New Testament:



Romans 11:26-27

King James Version (KJV)

26And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.


Is this not the Covenant which God promised to the Houses of israel and Judah? We have the Deliverer Who shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob, or, collective Israel, as opposed to divided Israel at the time of the promise. And that makes sense: could Israel remain divided at this time, when this is fulfilled? Even beyond that, can man in general be divided, when God determined to make one of the twain?

Or should we suppose that the New Covenant is a future event that will take place in the life of Israel, not yet established?

I would just ask one question: what do you take this to mean?



1 Corinthians 11:23-26

King James Version (KJV)

23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.


Christ said...



Luke 22:19-20

King James Version (KJV)

19And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

20Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.


Paul stated:



2 Corinthians 3

King James Version (KJV)

6Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.


Okay, that is just an overview of where I stand. Before writing this off, if you have never looked at this in earnest, I would just suggest that this is be done. Wile there is not a great deal of material dealing with this subject, there is enough to have an excellent discussion about it, and I look forward to it.

God bless.

 

[billwald]

Moses/God clearly closed the Canon in Deut thus any "new" post Torah covenant must be non-conflicting commentary on Torah.

 

[Darrell C]

Moses/God clearly closed the Canon in Deut thus any "new" post Torah covenant must be non-conflicting commentary on Torah.

Edit- what do you see that conflicts?

 

[Darrell C]

Moses/God clearly closed the Canon in Deut thus any "new" post Torah covenant must be non-conflicting commentary on Torah.

Is this to say that you embrace only the Torah as scripture?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I'm not sure what you mean. However, Scriptures show that God deals with his people through covenants and mankind in general through covenants rather than dispensations. Therefore Covenant Theology is Orthodox unless you mean some new created fad - Like prayer of Jabez or 40 days of everything or isolinear consetration of the cosmos. You get the idea.

 

[mandym]

1Co_9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
Eph_1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph_3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

 

[Thinkingstuff]

1Co_9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
Eph_1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Eph_3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

Uh... no

If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me.

to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

2 Surely you have heard about the administration of God’s grace that was given to me for you,


this is better contextually ie trus or administration of Grace or of the covenant. Rather than time periods of God dealing differently with man based on some dispensational perspective.

We see the Adamic Covenant the Noahide Covenant the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant for all people through out scripture.

 

[mandym]

Uh...yes, Covenants do not negate dispensations. In the OT believers were indwelt with the Spirit of God now we are. In the OT there was no focus on outreach to gentiles, now there is. In the OT the gospel was in part a mystery, now it is not. It is not an either or scenario.

 

[th1bill]

New Testament Christianity and Covenants are all oxymorons! God has, in all of history made just one covenant with His Creation. To insinuate otherwise is to declare that God had to correct His mistake. That is absolute nonsense, God has never made a mistake!

The purpose of the Law was never to save anyone. The, so called, Old Testament Saints spent the time between their deaths and the death of the Messiah in Paradise/Abrahan´s Buxom until the death of Jesus. (Matt. 27:50-52) These Saints wee saved in the same manor as I was in 1990, by faith, not the Law!

I do not know your friend but there is a red flag that just flew, immediately, ¨he runs a church.¨ A Church Family is ¨run¨ by nobody. The head of all of them is Jesus but they are only ¨run¨ by a man when they are not of God.

 

[Darrell C]

New Testament Christianity and Covenants are all oxymorons! God has, in all of history made just one covenant with His Creation. To insinuate otherwise is to declare that God had to correct His mistake. That is absolute nonsense, God has never made a mistake!

The purpose of the Law was never to save anyone. The, so called, Old Testament Saints spent the time between their deaths and the death of the Messiah in Paradise/Abrahan´s Buxom until the death of Jesus. (Matt. 27:50-52) These Saints wee saved in the same manor as I was in 1990, by faith, not the Law!

I do not know your friend but there is a red flag that just flew, immediately, ¨he runs a church.¨ A Church Family is ¨run¨ by nobody. The head of all of them is Jesus but they are only ¨run¨ by a man when they are not of God.

Hello th1bill, could you expand a little on how "New Testament Christianity and Covenants are all oxymorons!"

As well as "God has, in all of history made just one covenant with His Creation."

Thanks in advance.

 

[billwald]

If you were a 1st century Jew then Jesus would meet this definition of a new god.

Deuteronomy 13

Worshiping Other Gods

1 [a]If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, 17 and none of the condemned things[c] are to be found in your hands. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger, will show you mercy, and will have compassion on you. He will increase your numbers, as he promised on oath to your ancestors— 18 because you obey the LORD your God by keeping all his commands that I am giving you today and doing what is right in his eyes.

F

 

[Alive in Christ]

Regarding theology, ALL of the scriptures are important and relevant.

However, the MOST important scriptures...for us now... are the New Covenant scriptures. So much error occurs when people do not interpret the old covenant scriptures through the light of the new covenant scriptures.

The new testament is our PRIMARY source for doctrine. We do not of course throw the OT out, or disregard it. But it is not our primary source for doctrine in the New Covenant dispensation.