Covenant Theology vs. Dispensationalism

Richard Belcher, in his work A Comparison of Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology, provides an excellent (which of course includes the idea of brief!) sketch of the two main systems of theology: Covenant theology and dispensationalism.


Belcher begins by defining each system, which he does quite fairly and succinctly. Then he offers a comparison of each on specific topics, such as God's people, God's plan of salvation, future state, etc.

All of this makes the article quite beneficial for learning about the two systems. The only negative I might sight is that he does not offer a critique either one. This is obviously not his purpose, so my frowning on it is somewhat obsolete.

Being that Ashland, along with the rest of America, is awash in Dispensationalism, I would offer these as aids in seeing the flaws of the system: Dispensationalism: A fundementally flawed system; Problems with Dispensationalism; Dispensationalism (longer, but more in depth--worth the read, especially if you are going to make a comment on this post defending dispensationalism!).

I believe that I should also provide some a couple of good links to articles on Covenant Theology too. I understand that most people in our area have never even heard of it as those who promote dispensationalism never even mention the fact that there is a competing theological viewpoint. Here are 12 lectures by Ligon Duncan on the topic. This one is quite a bit more brief, yet still good. I should note too the initial link above does a very good job of laying out the position.

Having mixed with my dispensational brothers quite a bit in the last five years (and having held to many of its tenets myself when I was younger), I would like to posit some of my own comments as a critique of the dispensational system.

First, I will reiterate the point that most dispensationalists in Ashland don't even know that they are a dispensationalist. For that matter, they probably do not even know the term dispensationalist (I know that I never did). It is just the framework that they have always been fed, explicitly or implicitly. Moreover, most are not full blooded dispensationalists. This is due to the fact that these folk (to their great credit!) take their Bible's seriously and read it, all the while appropriating its teachings to their hearts. As a result, they don't see a lot of the classic dispensational distinctions that are taught by the "pure bred dispi's." While they may have been taught that the Scriptures are divided up, they still read the OT and believe it applies to them personally and not to the future, "literal" Jewish kingdom exclusively.

My second remark has to do with those who profess to be Reformed and Dispensational. It is highly ironic that my dispensational brothers believe in the sovereignty of God and that He is working out His eternal plan. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that they do. It shows that they are believing what the Scripture says about the decrees of God. However, Reformed theology is completely incompatible with dispensationalism because dispensationalism believes that there are two plans (one for Israel and one for the church).

Dispensationalism says that Christ came to earth to be the one who restored the Jewish kingdom, but the Jews rejected him and crucified him. So God had to resort to plan B. This gives birth to the notion of the church. The church age is considered a parenthetical age, which will eventually be taken out (i.e. raptured) so that God can get back to plan A.

Hopefully you see the irony: God is sovereign, but those Jews messed up His plan by crucifying His Son. If one really believes that God is sovereign, one cannot believe that He has two plans and that the church age is a parenthetical age. It should be obvious that Dispensationalism has a distinctly Arminian flavor.

Thirdly, the use (or neglect) of the OT by the dispensationalists is remarkable. Those who would be hard core dispensationalist pitch it all together. Since the OT has to do with the the kingdom of Israel, rather than with Christians in the Church age, it has absolutely no relevance to today. So, when I've sought to apply OT Scriptures to certain situations, I would hear things like, "But that's the Old Testament!" Interpretation: "Hello! That doesn't apply here in the Church age!"

For these die hard Dispi's I wonder why they don't just go ahead and tear the OT right out of their Bibles. Carrying around a pocket NT would be a lot easier...and consistent.

As I said though, most are not at that hard core dispi. level. Nevertheless, they do read the OT in light of the future Jewish kingdom (rather than seeing all the promises as Yes and Amen in Christ). I've heard people teaching this way. That is, I've heard them teaching certain passages and how they relate to the future kingdom. To this I say, why bother? Why teach it? It has no relevance to us, so how can it be profitable for training us in righteousness? Again, it would be more consistent to simply cut those pages out and spend our time in passages that are relevant to our context.

Another item that I would offer by way of critique is one that most grieves my heart. This is that none of these dispensationalist churches would accept my family and me as members. We would be banned from membership because we believe in the unity/continuity of Scripture and were all baptized as infants. The underlying assumption is, "You are not a real Christian."

The only way we could join is if we offend our conscience by disavowing our baptism and submitting to an immersion. Even if I could do that, I still would have a problem with joining. That's because my youngest daughter still would not be recognized as a child of God.

As a covenant theologian, I believe that my children, even before they profess faith in Christ, are God's children, and therefore members of his church. Being that they are holy (i.e. set apart to God [1 Cor. 7]), they have special rights and privileges that God grants to them. A dispensational church does not recognize children as having that privileged status or in any way part of God's church. Sure, they may be dedicated or presented (but certainly not baptized!), but they are just as much heathen as the pagan kid in Istanbul

This severance of children leads to a comment on the practice of excluding children from worship in the dispensational churches. Here I must admit that the dispensational churches are, unfortunately, consistent with their beliefs. If children are not children of God, then they don't belong in the worship service. I've talked about how children are excluded from services in other posts, but I have never linked it to directly to dispensationalism. Nevertheless, the correlation is clear.

This is, of course, why I'm not too worried about the overall longevity of Dispensationalism. I personally believe that it will eventually die out simply for the fact that it is not self reproducing. Dispi's children are not raised to worship and fear the Lord. So when they get older no one will be there to carry on the belief system. (Don't believe me? Then tell my why 85% of children who are raised in the church are turning away from the faith by the time they are freshman in college!)

Sunday Sermons to be Christmas at the Movies

It used to be that people went to church to hear the Word of God and sound exposition of Scripture. People could hear God speak, know His will, and respond to His redemptive work. Today church going people have Christmas at the Movies, a study of various themes from movies like It's a Wonderful Life and Miracle on 34th Street.

No doubt a few Bible verses will be thrown in to justify whatever comments will be made on trivial "spiritual" topics. We all know though that there will be no prophetic voice in it. The only thing these messages will do is boost that fuzzy holiday spirit that makes you want to shop.

To be sure, the Word of God is rare.

Sermons Available for Listening

I just wanted you all to know that you can now listen to my sermons online or download them to your audio devices. They are available at my new website: www.kindledfire.com. When you get there, you can subscribe to them and have them sent to your inbox or itunes. The link at the side bar here has also been updated to reflect the change.

You might ask why I chose the title, "Kindled Fire." I chose it based on Jeremiah 20:9, and a sermon I once heard on it in college. In this passage Jeremiah talks about having an unquenchable desire to preach. It is as if a fire were penned up in his bones and it could not be held back. It is that spirit that resides in me. I've tried other occupations in life. I've tried avoiding the call to be a minister of the gospel, but I find that I'm driven to preach. I affirm the words of the Apostle Paul, "Woe to me if I preach not the gospel."

The title also derived from an excellent book that Zack Eswine wrote, entitled Kindled Fire. It is a book that details the preaching of Charles Spurgeon, and is intended to allow the reader to "apprentice" under the Prince of Preachers. In it Eswine quotes Spurgeon as saying to his seminary students, "Let the fire be kindled, brethren! Let the fire be kindled by the Holy Ghost!"

I also like the imagery of fire (and the above image of the flaming dove) used in Acts 2. When the Holy Spirit descended, the apostles automatically began to preach. It couldn't be helped. Their mouths began to move and words were formed simply by the unction of the Spirit.

I'm not one who believes in the continuing gift of tongues as the Apostles were noted to have done. However I do believe that some men have been raised up and equipped by the Spirit to bring the Word to bear on the lives of people. When that Spirit moves in such a way, it is impossible to keep one's mouth closed. He creates an unquenchable passion for the truth to be proclaimed.

Lord willing, you will see that divine unction for yourself as you listen.

Jonathan Edwards Denies His Daughter's Hand in Marriage

In preparing for tomorrow's message on anger I found this story. It doesn't fit my message, but it is a real gem. I wanted to share it.

It is related that a young man went one day to the famous New England preacher, Jonathan Edwards, to ask for his daughter’s hand in marriage. The venerable minister replied, “You cannot have her.”
“But I lover her!” said the man.
“No matter, you can’t have her.”
“But she loves me too.”
“I say you can’t have her.”
“But I am well off and can support her.”
“You can’t have her, I tell you.”
“Why not, Mr. Edwards? What have you against me?”
“I have nothing against you.”
“Well then, why can’t I have Emily as my bride?”
“Because I think you are a decent sort of man and are too good for her.”
“What? Mr. Edwards, whatever do you mean?”
“She’s got a wicked temper, and you wouldn’t be happy with her.”
“But I thought she was a Christian?”
"So she is, young man, so she is. But before you have to lived as long as I have you’ll find that there are some people in this world that the grace of God can live with, but you can’t.”

Fortune Telling on the Rise in America

First atheism, then paganism. That's the trend that always develops.

No doubt that is exactly what is happening in our land today. Fox News is reporting that our down economy is giving a boost to psychics and tarot card readers as many are looking for good news regarding their financial future. To be sure, it will be long until we hear reports about how people have started reading chicken entrails.

How did we get to this point? It all began when we started denying God's rule and existence. Now that the comfort of His sovereign, caring hand has been vanquished from men's minds, people must turn to other avenues for some semblance of peace and hope. As a result, people look to supposed mediums and mediators that may provide that comfort.

Moreover, in atheism one understands that the events of the world are simply random and meaningless events strung together by nothing other than cause and effect. Fortune telling is a perfect follow up because it seeks to make sense of the random and meaningless. In tarot readings cards are turned over at random and chance is the name of the game. Crystal balls and palm reading are perfect matches too because everything is simply fate (determinism is the essence of atheistic cause and effect).

We all need reassurance regarding the state of things tomorrow. That is human nature. However, those who deny God are bound to flounder in the ocean of anxiety. They are forced to depend upon their own limited resources. Being that these do not provide any help in the long run, we must turn to those who pose as diagnosticians of the future (Unfortunately--pun intended, fortune tellers and gypsies are just as limited as anyone else).

Peering beyond the curtain of today requires contact with the God who creates tomorrow and sees the end from the beginning. As well, in Christianity one need not turn to a human mediator (priest or pastor) for answers. You can get what you need yourself by simply directing your attention to what God himself has revealed in His Word.

For those truly concerned about how things will turn out down the road, Christ's word is quite simple (Matt 5): Do not worry about tomorrow. Seek first the kingdom of God. All the things you need will be provided, just as they are for the rest of the earth's creatures. The sovereign God who controls the events of life upholds all things and keeps His eye particularly upon those who trust in Him.

Are You Emergent

I know that a number of folks in Ashland don't have a clue what it means to be "emergent." But if you are into the emergent church thing--or if you don't know what it is but know your pastor likes to try to be as hip or on the "cutting edge" of doing church as possible-- you should probably read the post Just One More Savage Wolf from the baylyblog.com.

As well, if you have books by Rob Bell and Bryan McLaren laying around your church, you will want to do some research on them. I highly recommend the book "Why We Are Not Emergent: by two guys who should be" by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck. You will laugh as these guys explain how the emergent church strays from the faith that was once for all delivered up to the saints.

The Reformed View of Sex

Okay, here it is. The long expected sermon on the Reformed View of Sex, other wise known as the spirituality of sexual intercourse. It is my hope that this sermon stirs the body as much as it does the soul.