Covenant theology is the Gospel set in the context of God�s eternal plan of communion with his people, and its historical outworking in the covenants of works and grace (as well as in the various progressive stages of the covenant of grace). Covenant theology explains the meaning of the death of Christ in light of the fullness of the biblical teaching on the divine covenants, undergirds our understanding of the nature and use of the sacraments, and provides the fullest possible explanation of the grounds of our assurance.
To put it another way, Covenant theology is the Bible�s way of explaining and deepening our understanding of: (1) the atonement [the meaning of the death of Christ]; (2) assurance [the basis of our confidence of communion with God and enjoyment of his promises]; (3) the sacraments [signs and seals of God�s covenant promises � what they are and how they work]; and (4) the continuity of redemptive history [the unified plan of God�s salvation]. Covenant theology is also an hermeneutic, an approach to understanding the Scripture � an approach that attempts to biblically explain the unity of biblical revelation.
When Jesus wanted to explain the significance of His death to His disciples, He went to the doctrine of the covenants (see Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, 1 Corinthians 11). When God wanted to assure Abraham of the certainty of His word of promise, He went to the covenant (Genesis 12, 15, and 17). When God wanted to set apart His people, ingrain His work in their minds, tangibly reveal Himself in love and mercy, and confirm their future inheritance, He gave the covenant signs (Genesis 17, Exodus 12, 17, and 31, Matthew 28, Acts 2, Luke 22). When Luke wanted to show early Christians that Jesus� life and ministry were the fulfillment of God�s ancient purposes for His chosen people, he went to the covenants and quoted Zacharias� prophecy which shows that believers in the very earliest days of �the Jesus movement� understood Jesus and His messianic work as a fulfillment (not a �Plan B�) of God�s covenant with Abraham (Luke 1:72-73). When the Psalmist and the author of Hebrews want to show how God�s redemptive plan is ordered and on what basis it unfolds in history, they went to the covenants (see Psalm 78, 89, Hebrews 6-10).
Covenant theology is not a response to dispensationalism. It existed long before the rudiments of classical dispensationalism were brought together in the nineteenth century. Covenant theology is not an excuse for baptizing children, nor merely a convention to justify a particular approach to the sacraments (modern paedocommunionism and baptismal regenerationism). Covenant theology is not sectarian, but an ecumenical Reformed approach to understanding the Bible, developed in the wake of the magisterial Reformation, but with roots stretching back to the earliest days of catholic Christianity and historically appreciated in all the various branches of the Reformed community (Baptist, Congregationalist, Independent, Presbyterian, Anglican, and Reformed). Covenant theology cannot be reduced to serving merely as the justification for some particular view of children in the covenant (covenant successionism), or for a certain kind of eschatology, or for a specific philosophy of education (whether it be homeschooling or Christian schools or classical schools). Covenant theology is bigger than that. It is more important than that.
�The doctrine of the covenant lies at the root of all true theology. It has been said that he who well understands the distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, is a master of divinity. I am persuaded that most of the mistakes which men make concerning the doctrines of Scripture, are based upon fundamental errors with regard to the covenant of law and of grace. May God grant us now the power to instruct, and you the grace to receive instruction on this vital subject.� Who said this? C.H. Spurgeon � the great English Baptist preacher! Certainly a man beyond our suspicion of secretly purveying a Presbyterian view of the sacraments to the unsuspecting evangelical masses.
Covenant theology flows from the trinitarian life and work of God. God�s covenant communion with us is modeled on and a reflection of the intra-trinitarian relationships. The shared life, the fellowship of the persons of the Holy Trinity, what theologians call perichoresis or circumincessio, is the archetype of the relationship the gracious covenant God shares with His elect and redeemed people. God�s commitments in the eternal covenant of redemptive find space-time realization in the covenant of grace.
Great article, I get what the author is saying, but he goes to far....imagine that. The Gospel is the Gospel plain and simple, it is not "Covenant Theology" ; a systematic study of covenants. One IS, the other is 'about'.
Aren't those who are into Covenant Theology also into Replacement Theology? You don't believe that national Israel will be saved at the return of Christ, or even believe there is a national Israel?
Aren't those who are into Covenant Theology also into Replacement Theology? You don't believe that national Israel will be saved at the return of Christ, or even believe there is a national Israel?
James replies:
Not replacement, Expansion.
All Christians, or believers in the Messiah, are spiritual Israel.
God has had one purpose and plan for mankind ever since the Fall: to restore a people for Himself from fallen humanity through Messiah Jesus.
National and ethnic Israel can only find true meaning within the larger context of the renewal of all things through the Messiah. God's purposes are one. God created the Jewish people to bring Messiah to the world. You cannot divorce any of the promises to Israel from the "big picture" of redemption from the Fall through Messiah.
"For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham" (Luke 3:8).
There is one verse in the New Testament that could be interpreted to mean that right before Christ returns, the majority of Ethnic Jews will accept the Messiah. It is only a possibility though. I won't hang a doctrine on one verse.
As far as the modern day nation of Israel, that means nothing according to Scripture.
I realize we live in a age of ignorance about the Bible, and we dispensationalists all over the place. But dispensationalism has holes in it big enough to drive a truck through, and they hyper literalize Revelations, and ignore rules of interpretation, etc.
James, you are correct, so please allow me to humbly ask you a couple questions:
If the spirit of man is literally dead then why does man apart from Christ have to die twice, once physical and once in the lake of fire as described in Revelation.
Also why would Jesus say don't be afraid of those who can kill the body, but fear Him who can destroy both the body and soul, if the soul of man is already literally dead?
James if you do not have the answers to these questions then you have hyper-literalized the word dead and your doctrine begins to fall like dominos.
From day one I have told you I agree with the basics of your doctrine, however after scripture is hyper-literalized or hyper-figurativized depending on what doctrine you are trying to prove you present a distorted doctrine of truth and claim IT IS the Gospel.
you have still not answered the question, how can the spirit/soul of a man be killed/destroyed in the next life if it is already dead? Does God make the unregenerate man alive in the next life just so that He can destroy him?
Please don't act like you don't get this or can't see it, I know you can if you will let yourself see honestly.
I am wondering if you have given up on denying that Paul is talking about spiritual death in Eph. 2......?
I mean it would be ridiculous to try and say he was talking about physical death, because that would mean he was telling the Ephesian church members that they had been physically resurrected!
So, I am hoping you are dropping that idea.
If you recall the doctrine of Total depravity, or Total inability, that stated that mankind was NOT as wicked as he can be, but rather that the spiritual death of man because of The Fall, meant that the TOTALITY of man was effected, including His Will.
This spiritual death that Paul speaks of, is talking about man's inability to repent and choose Christ. A will enslaved to sin, will never choose to repent and trust in Jesus.
When Jesus said that God could destroy both body and soul in Hell, that Jesus was talking about something FAR worse than just a will enslaved to sin.
We don't know much about Hell. I have read C.S.Lewis' idea of Hell, and I think he has some ideas about it that may be right.
But, I do think that clearly, what God is going to do to the soul in Hell, will be FAR worse than the effects of the Fall on all mankind.
Aw James, I asked you not to close your eyes. No this is not talking about physical death it is talking about spiritual death; figuratively, which is exactly why Scripture speaks of a looming spiritual death for unbelievers; they are condemned. If you can't see that is a possibility, then you refuse to see it.
