Covenant Theology vs New Covenant Theology

I grew up with dispensational theology but it seems that the more I study theology, I have come around to a general type of covenant theology.  The challenge I’m left with now is, “Do I believe in covenant theology (CT) or new covenant theology (NCT)?”  What are all the specific differences?  I’m not sure about these yet.

  • CT would believe that God made a covenant of grace with Christ and God’s people, along with Adam.
  • NCT prefers to stay away from using the term “covenant of grace”.

    Is it just the use of terminology or is there a better reason for NCTs to not use it?

  • Dispensationalism believes the O.T. law is no longer in effect unless repeated in the N.T.
  • CT would believe that all the laws are still in effect unless they’ve been done away with in the N.T.
  • NCT: (same as dispensationalists)

    The problem with CT is that we have to differentiate between laws that are ceremonial, civil, and moral. How do we divide these and get rid of parts of the laws like ceremonial and civil but keep the moral laws? 

Advertisements

Author: Kevin S.

A follower of Jesus, a husband and a father. Hobbies include biking, keeping fish if they don't die on me, blogging when I can, theologizing and ministry, and pondering about world affairs.

4 thoughts on “Covenant Theology vs New Covenant Theology”

  1. I feel your pain. I’m stuck between Disp. and CT and NCT, but find none of them satisfactory. CT’s division of the law into moral, civil and ceremonial is an unfortunate result of their faulty underlying (non-biblical) framework of two (or three) over-arching covenants existing throughout all time for all people.
    I like NCT better than Dispensational theology, but I wish NCT would go a little further and correct the view that the covenant begins with the ‘birth’ of Christ – ie, it would be nice to see a formal theological system that recognized that a covenant cannot be in effect without blood (the cross).

    Like

  2. Regarding the division of the law, why not just consider ourselves as _not_ being under any of it, including the moral law, and consider ourselves as _en-lawed_ to Christ. In other words, we’re not under moral law – in the sense of “we will do it” and “it will be righteousness to us”, but we are in Christ and He is in us (if we belong to Him), and His nature corresponds to the morality of the law (since the law is from God and is holy).
    He kept the law and He is our obedience. Those who belong to Him choose to, in view of God’s mercy, present themselves to Him in holiness and purity – all centered around selfless, agape Love, as a _response_ to His love… Not as a way of life that initiates and earns a response from God for keeping “our part of the deal”!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s