Covenant Theology vs. Dispensational Theology

[smaller]

Paul taught two covenants, and did so via the understandings of allegory, whereby he allegorized not only the lives of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael, but also the law itself. Gal. 4-5 among other places.

Technically speaking, on an allegorical/parable analysis basis, things are not as they appear trying to derive from literalism.

Paul 1 Cor. 9 for example takes an obscure law from the O.T. and allegorizes it, deriving an entirely different meaning than the literal sense, and comes up with an entirely new meaning, claiming that is what is "really" written:

I'll bold/underline the literal law in red, the allegorical dissection in blue.

7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

For students of allegory, they might ask the Holy Spirit, just how does that work? How did Paul derive this? We'll NOT find the blue
"this is written" anywhere prior, but in Paul's analysis.

There is an entirely different "as it is written" Bible that exists, but can not be seen by performing literal analysis. It's quite an amazing Divine Document in this regards.

The above example is no different than what Paul taught in Gal. 4-5 or in many other citings. People can read the literal til they are red in the face, and will never, in a whole lifetime, see or find the BLUE document.

 

[smaller]

Believers, generally, rightfully conclude they are not under the "literal law." That is TRUE.

But that is not how Paul saw the law. Paul again "allegorized" the entirety of the law, claiming this rightful claim:

Romans 7:14
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Yes, we "should" know that the law is spiritual. This automatically takes it OUT of the literal senses and applications, just as Paul did in 1 Cor. 9 above.

And Paul goes on to PLACE US as believers UNDER the Law of the Spirit, in the Spiritual Application of the LAW and not only makes the noted laws therein, but EVERY COMMAND in the entire Bible revolves around this command, right here in Romans 13:

8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

Anyone who does not "do this" will never see the BLUE BIBLE. They have not submitted themselves to the reality of the LAW OF THE SPIRIT. The Holy Spirit guarantees they will NOT SEE.

So, before denying the law, we might understand that we are actually UNDER all of it, every jot and tittle, when it is read in the Spiritual Light of the BLUE. Did Jesus teach Paul this? Undoubtedly. Matt. 22, Mark 12, Luke 10 are Jesus' FACT on this identical matter. James 2:8 teaches the same thing. So does John the Apostle in many citings.

But a carnal person can not see this, nor can they submit to the Spirit of the Law, nor can they understand it. And they never will.

Romans 8:7
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

So, be careful how you measure.

 

[smaller]

The present reality of the TWO COVENANTS.

We often think that the Bible is only written to/for man. That is not and never was the case.

Why? Because the LAW was written against sinners, per Paul, here:

1 Timothy 1:9
Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

Does that mean it's only against people? Uh, no. Who else does scripture show to be "a sinner?"

1 John 3:8
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

You see in the above that there are OTHER sinners that are not man. That would be the devil and his messengers. Yes, the LAW is factually against THEM. The Law was never just about MAN.

The TWO COVENANTS were first displayed in the Garden of Eden. The first covenant came when God BLESSED ADAM.

The second came with the LAW, do not eat, against SINNERS. Did that LAW then move Satan to resist that Law? Of course. The law, after all, is for sinners, and the devil, the tempter, Satan is certainly A SINNER.

How do we know that Satan is moved into adverse actions by the LAW? Jesus showed this to be a reality, here:

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

The Law is certainly God's Word. Is Satan moved to resist God's Word? Of course.

The reality of the TWO COVENANTS is that Satan will resist the law and be moved against the law.

The Two Covenants are interwoven. The same Word that blesses MAN, moves against Satan, and he/they of his own/ RESIST. Just like clockwork.

The reality of these TWO COVENANTS still exist today, in real life, and in real time.

Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Is earth still here? Uh, yeah. What Jesus said was 100% fact about the law. Because it is against sinners, against the devil and his messengers, it CAN NOT PASS AWAY.

And, because the Spirit of the LAW is LOVE, neither can IT pass away anymore than God Himself could pass away.

 

[smaller]

If there is any "dispensational analysis" to be had in these matters, it would be that sin derives it's strength from the law, 1 Cor. 15:56, Romans 7:13, that being because Satan "resists" it. And there is a guarantee in the law, that sin will become utterly sinful. This is a progression or dispensation if you will. The lowly serpent in the Garden, by the end of the Bible, becomes a GREAT DRAGON. There is the reality of dispensation. And to no good sight.

If we observe "the law" it expands. It started with the first law in the garden. Is enhanced after the flood in the Noahide statements, expands again under Abraham, and an even greater flood of laws comes with a larger body of people in Israel, post Egypt. And this ultimately completes itself in the flesh body of Jesus, THE LIVING WALKING LAW, the Word of God Himself, in flesh, on earth.

All of these point to the "acceleration" of LAW and the adversity that follows by the resistance parties, Satan and his messengers.

We might observe that if the law caused all those problems with Adam and hence, all mankind, then within Israel, eventually with Grace and Truth personified by God Himself in the flesh, Living Word on earth, that all is sufficient enough to run the gamut of lawlessness to it's final completion. And that's pretty much the pattern we are currently in.

If the O.T. law caused trouble to come to Israel, Grace and Truth made it even moreso. Trouble is now upon the "whole earth" and mankind currently abides, in the flesh, within and under control of the auspices of Mystery Babylon.

 

[jasonc]

The idea of a jew saved now is a Christian but in the millenium he remains a hebrew is strange to me

 

[GodsGrace]

God has always only had but one spiritual people. Started before Cain and Abel I presume. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it was offered in faith. The 'people of God' were always those who lived by faith.

Hi Cyberseeker

Help! Over one hour on the video link. No can do. But know the covenants well.

New Covenant theology just means The New Covenant, right?
Or, the covenant of grace as opposed to the old or mosaic covenant of the Law.
Is this what the video says?

Thanks
Wondering

 

[Cyberseeker]

Hi Cyberseeker

Help! Over one hour on the video link. No can do. But know the covenants well.

New Covenant theology just means The New Covenant, right?
Or, the covenant of grace as opposed to the old or mosaic covenant of the Law.
Is this what the video says?

Thanks
Wondering

Yes, that is basically what it says. The problem with Covt. Theology (sorry the names are so similar) is that it teaches that the 10 commandments were contained in a covenant given to Adam prior to Moses. This is, of course, pure speculation, but it is written into the Westminster Confession, and that is an influential document as far as reformed doctrine is concerned.

I think Covenant Theology is better than Dispensationalism, but NCT is better again. Do a google on "New Covenant theology" bro.

 

[reba]

having done a bit tiny bit of research into Scofield ..i am very happy to be free of dispensational teaching..

 

[Cyberseeker]

Yeah, you wouldnt want him as your grand papa would you?

 

[reba]

in the family there is a 1909 scofield Bible.. interesting.. in my opinion he is as off the mark as EGW ...

 

[Sinthesis]

Are these theologies primarily Protestant constructs? Are there any other popular ones?

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, that is basically what it says. The problem with Covt. Theology (sorry the names are so similar) is that it teaches that the 10 commandments were contained in a covenant given to Adam prior to Moses. This is, of course, pure speculation, but it is written into the Westminster Confession, and that is an influential document as far as reformed doctrine is concerned.

I think Covenant Theology is better than Dispensationalism, but NCT is better again. Do a google on "New Covenant theology" bro.

Hi Cyberseeker

Thanks for the reply. I've never heard of the 10 Commandments being given to A and E. I studied both the Adamic Covenant which is unconditional (God will find a way to save His people) and the first Edenic Covenant which is conditional (on not eating of the fruit - or obeying).

Covenants are between God and Man. All men, although He revealed Himself to the Hebrews for different reasons. For instance, they liked to tell stories, pass them on down and even write them so as not to forget.

I don't know too much about dispensatinalism. I should take the time to read up above and maybe check it out a bit - although I doubt I could agree with it since it has something to do with the Hebrews only - I think.

It makes sense that the 10 C should be given to Moses. The Israelites had been in captivity for about 400 years and had forgotten how to have a civilized community. Laws are needed. Let's remember that the law was also given to show that we are sinners. And can it really be kept? No.

Now oddly enough, the Mosaic (or Sinai) Covenant does seem to be with the people of Israel. it's conditional on whether or not obedience is kept. The people are to keep the ceremony (offering of blood on the altar) and they are to keep the Sabbath.

Luckily, Jesus said we are grafted in, and He has become our Sabbath and has supplied to final blood on the altar.
And so we have become God's treasured possession. Exodus 19:5

Wondering

 

[Roro1972]

Rom 3
1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Adam and Eve were not Jews neither are new covenant believers

 

[JLB]

Rom 3
1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Adam and Eve were not Jews neither are new covenant believers

Neither was Abraham.

And you shall answer and say before the Lord your God: ‘My father was a Syrian, about to perish, and he went down to Egypt and dwelt there, few in number; and there he became a nation, great, mighty, and populous. Deuteronomy 26:5



JLB

 

[JLB]

Hi Cyberseeker

Thanks for the reply. I've never heard of the 10 Commandments being given to A and E. I studied both the Adamic Covenant which is unconditional (God will find a way to save His people) and the first Edenic Covenant which is conditional (on not eating of the fruit - or obeying).

Covenants are between God and Man. All men, although He revealed Himself to the Hebrews for different reasons. For instance, they liked to tell stories, pass them on down and even write them so as not to forget.

I don't know too much about dispensatinalism. I should take the time to read up above and maybe check it out a bit - although I doubt I could agree with it since it has something to do with the Hebrews only - I think.

It makes sense that the 10 C should be given to Moses. The Israelites had been in captivity for about 400 years and had forgotten how to have a civilized community. Laws are needed. Let's remember that the law was also given to show that we are sinners. And can it really be kept? No.

Now oddly enough, the Mosaic (or Sinai) Covenant does seem to be with the people of Israel. it's conditional on whether or not obedience is kept. The people are to keep the ceremony (offering of blood on the altar) and they are to keep the Sabbath.

Luckily, Jesus said we are grafted in, and He has become our Sabbath and has supplied to final blood on the altar.
And so we have become God's treasured possession. Exodus 19:5

Wondering

The Ten Commandments were in the earth, before The Lord wrote them in stone.

because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.” Genesis 26:5



JLB

 

[Roro1972]

The Ten Commandments were in the earth, before The Lord wrote them in stone.

because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.” Genesis 26:5



JLB

i wonder with Adam and Eve the only two on earth even with kids only 1st six apply I dont see all 10

 

[Sinthesis]

We don't really know what theological doctrine Abraham observed. We do know that it was insufficient absent the work of Jesus Christ, but through faith in God it anticipated the work of Jesus Christ.

 

[GodsGrace]

The Ten Commandments were in the earth, before The Lord wrote them in stone.

because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.” Genesis 26:5



JLB

Your verse is plainly referring to Abraham. Adam was a long way from Abraham, no?

I believe you're speaking to the Natural Law - which is, of course, given by God.

Adam and Eve had one command:
Do not eat of the fruit -

They couldn't even keep that one!

There was always Law - the natural one. When Cain killed his brother he broke a law. But it was not written yet.
One of the reasons Moses was given the written Law was to show man that he was a sinner and would not even be able to keep it. AND to show us how to live well and within God's commands.

Then the laws got to be 613.
Then Jesus narrowed it down to two.
Which is all we need.

Wondering
P.S. For Genesis 26:5 could you please check a different version? The word "commandments" should be "commands".

 

[JLB]

Your verse is plainly referring to Abraham. Adam was a long way from Abraham, no?

I believe you're speaking to the Natural Law - which is, of course, given by God.

Adam and Eve had one command:
Do not eat of the fruit -

They couldn't even keep that one!

There was always Law - the natural one. When Cain killed his brother he broke a law. But it was not written yet.
One of the reasons Moses was given the written Law was to show man that he was a sinner and would not even be able to keep it. AND to show us how to live well and within God's commands.

Then the laws got to be 613.
Then Jesus narrowed it down to two.
Which is all we need.

Wondering
P.S. For Genesis 26:5 could you please check a different version? The word "commandments" should be "commands".

To me, Adam and Abraham had the same command.

When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless. Genesis 17:1

"Partake of Me and My Life, and you will not die".

They both were called into relationship with the Lord, and to receive His Life.

It's in keeping the one command to partake of His Life and Spirit, that enables us to keep the rest of His laws and commandments.

The Principle; Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.

Jesus said it this way: this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
John 17:3


The Lord is the only source of Life, as we spend time in His presence and hear His Voice, wil will receive His empowering life that equips us to overcome the desires of the flesh.


Walk in My presence, walk with Me, walk in My Spirit and you will not fulfill the lust's of the flesh.


Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. Galatians 5:16



JLB

 

[JLB]

We don't really know what theological doctrine Abraham observed. We do know that it was insufficient absent the work of Jesus Christ, but through faith in God it anticipated the work of Jesus Christ.

Abraham had a relationship with the same Lord who became flesh.

Abraham was the first member of the covenant with the Lord, the same covenant we are in today.

The New Covenant is not a "different covenant" than the Abrahamic Covenant, but a "Refreshed" Abrahamic Covenant.

Abraham knew the Lord, which is the definition of eternal life.

this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
John 17:3



JLB