NEW
COVENANT Theology (NCT)
In
my articles I have been using the term “Reformed” to refer to pure New
Testament teaching as distinct from “Dispensational” and “Covenant”
theologies with their carry-overs from the OT.
By such my intent has been to recognize the tremendous contributions of
Reformation thinkers in reformulating central biblical doctrines from Roman
Catholic distortions. Nevertheless, as
significant as their work was, it was not perfect. In several areas they contradicted their own
scriptural principles and beliefs by accommodating certain OT Roman Catholic
concepts such as paedobaptism. [see
chap.7 of BELIEVER’S BAPTISM – Sign of
the New Covenant in Christ, 06] What
I have been calling “Reformed” viewpoint is really older Baptist theology
described in the 1646 London Baptist Confession of faith which differed from
the Westminster Confession of Faith in certain key areas. Therefore, my reformed view (once known as Promise
and Fulfillment Theology) is New
Covenant Theology that is based upon the finality of NT as the pinnacle of
God’s revelation [see The revelation of the glory of
God in the face of Jesus Christ http://solochristo.com/_SC/SoloChristo.htm]. NCT’s goal is “to
join together…the logical priority of the NT over the Old…of Lord Jesus over
His godly predecessors, [Determining How Bible
Passages May Be Used http://pop.eradman.com] and…of the theology of the text over our own
theologies*…” NCT views the NT as governing all previous
revelation through the logic of progressive revelation by means of the analogy
of scripture [footnote 11 Scripture &
Conscience http://pop.eradman.com] according to the perspicuity (clarity, plainness, intelligibility) thereof. [See chap.2 RPCD
http://pop.eradman.com] NCT
recognizes and seeks to prevent OT system construct’s tide of inferences from
overflowing into the NT and overriding its teachings. Such constructs are often the products of logical extrapolations from
theological systems and have at times been promoted by historical-political
pressures rather than outright Biblical exegesis.
------------------
--------------------
NCT is a hermeneutic (a
way of interpreting the Bible) that clearly shows how the Bible fits together
because it is unencumbered by a pre-conceived
system of theology that drives its interpretation in any one direction. NCT
is free of any system of theology that would force it to interpret Scripture as
that system demands, allowing NCT to interpret Scripture free from any
pre-conceived theological bias.
The “New” in NCT does not
mean that NCT is a new or recent version of Covenant Theology, but is simply a
reference to the New Covenant itself and the supremacy of Christ. NCT is the
study and application of the New Covenant and is in the best of positions to
explain how the Old Testament relates to the New. NCT is a theology of the New
Covenant that elevates it to its proper place in redemptive history, without
the interpretive limitations of other theological systems such as Covenant
Theology and Dispensationalism.
What
Makes NCT Different from Covenant Theology?
Even with its strengths for which we are greatly indebted, Covenant Theology
remains both theologically and confessionally
restricted in its interpretation of Scripture. Its interpretation of Scripture
must not contradict the historical Reformed creeds and confessions, and in many
ways, is subject to them. By and large, the Covenant theologian’s
interpretation of Scripture must conform to the historical Reformed
confessions, and especially the Westminster Confession of Faith.
What
Makes NCT Different from Dispensationalism?
Dispensationalism, while facing a different set of
interpretive hurdles than Covenant Theology, is limited nonetheless by its
pre-conceived system of theology. There are many “flavors” of Dispensationalism today, making it unfair to attempt to
categorize it as one unified theological system. However, one major
interpretive weakness facing most Dispensational theologians is the belief that
the New Covenant is fully realized in the future and is ultimately intended for
the nation of
-----------------
A Brief Explanation of
"New Covenant Theology" by Fred G. Zaspel
http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/hermenutics/nct.htm
NCT and the More
Traditional Systems of Interpretation
Hermeneutics
It is agreed that the New Testament is the apex of God's
self-revelation. But traditional Covenant Theology has failed to appreciate it
fully. We argue this on exegetical grounds specifically, and also from the
general standpoints of the newness of the New Covenant, the heavy
"fulfillment" emphasis in the New Testament [See The
Theology of Fulfillment http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/eschatology/fulfllnt1.htm], the
Lordship of Jesus Christ, Jesus' superiority to Moses, our "slavery"
to Jesus Christ, the striking contrast between the Old and New Covenants found
in the New Testament, and so on. Further, this necessarily brings us into a
distinctive emphasis on Biblical theology with its eye to the Christocentric and progressive unfolding of redemptive
history. In short, traditional Covenant Theology has failed to appreciate fully
the significant advance that marks this age of New Testament revelation.
Law vs. Grace
For classical Dispensationalism
the principle of grace in the New Covenant replaces the Old Covenant principle
of law. Within Covenant Theology there seem to be some differences, with
some following Luther in seeing law and grace as parallel tracks running
through history and others recognizing that the words "law" and
"grace" characterize two periods in the development of God's plan of
redemption. NCT also recognizes that law and grace are sometimes names
for the two periods covered by the Old and New Covenants, but looks at the two
words as also defining two emphases, not the replacement of law by grace. We
see a greater emphasis on grace under the New Covenant and generally a more
legal character to the Old Covenant. In short, we argue that law remains
(contra Dispensational Theology), but with signification alteration (contra
Covenant Theology).
The Decalogue
Covenant Theology argues that the Decalogue is
the eternal, unchanging moral law of God. It defined duty before Moses,
"outside" Moses in the nations surrounding
NCT argues that these presuppositions are exegetically
unwarranted. It cannot be shown that the Decalogue is purely "moral"
in character. If pushed, we argue that the Sabbath has more a ceremonial
character to it. Neither can it be demonstrated that this supposed three-fold
division of Mosaic law -- moral, civil, ceremonial -- is a legitimate
hermeneutical tool for the understanding of the "abolition" passages
of the New Testament. Some of the NT passages which speak of the passing away
of the Old Covenant speak specifically in reference to the Decalogue (eg. 2 Cor.3). The presuppositions of Covenant Theology on
this point are just too simplistic. An answer must be found which can take in
all the relevant exegetical detail. [see 3 Studies Theological Notes http://pop.eradman.com/]
The Sabbath
Covenant Theology's shift of the Sabbath from Saturday
to Sunday is exegetically unwarranted and it further renders its
"unchangeableness of the Decalogue" argument null and void. We affirm
rather that the Sabbath had a prophetic function in its anticipation of the
gospel rest enjoyed by all who are in Christ, both now and in eternity (eg. Heb.4). This is a point of
Biblical Theology that Covenant Theologians have largely overlooked, although
there is nothing about it that is inherently inconsistent with their position.
However, while Covenant Theology argues the Puritan position that the
Sabbath day is to be kept distinctively holy in this gospel age, NCT argues
that this aspect of the Sabbath marks
the Old Covenant (eg. Ex.31; Col.2:16-17) and
emphasize rather the position of Luther and Calvin that the Sabbath finds its
fulfillment in Christ (Col.2:17). [see Keeping the Sabbath in Christ http://pop.eradman.com/]
Miscellany
Much of this is more a matter of differing emphases than
of differing theology -- it is, after all, an "in house" debate. And
there are other (lesser) questions which the discussion generates, such as the
role of law in preaching the gospel, the role of law/grace in sanctification,
the role of Divine law in human government, the relation of Christ to Moses,
the role of creeds, and so on. All these questions find answers of differing
emphasis even within each respective theological camp.