Progressive Dispensationalism vs. New Covenant Theology

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Siegfried, May 14, 2004.

  1. Siegfried

    Siegfried
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anybody familiar enough with both of them to be able to identify their distinctives? I'm just familiar enough with them to be dangerous so far. So far I can't find a nickel's worth of substantive difference.

    Is this debate an issue of semantics or are there some real differences? Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are very similar though I would say they are almost answering different questions. New Covenant Theology is about the law (and baptism) reacting the Covenant theology, while progressive dispensationalism is about the new covenant (as having been inagurated) and one people of God reacting to tradional dispensationlism. Towards this end they agree with a lot. But PD would tend towards remaining pre-trib/pre-mil while NCT doesn't even address this question (but its adherents probably tend towards amill). Also PD keeps a future for a ethnic nation of Israel while once again NCT doesn't address this issue (though its adherents would tend away from it yet see a great ingathering of ethnic Jews into the Church unlike their Covenant Theology brethren).
     
  3. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW, I just know enough to be dangerous as well.
     
  4. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pete,

    You are pretty correct. Yes, I agree with you, that what most postmill and amill believe.

    By the way, it is not necesscary for me as being myself covenant theologian.

    Notice the Bible have two parts - "Old Testament" and "New Testament".

    During Reformation period, many reformers understood between the pre-calvary and post-calvary period. Reformers understood that Christ fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament about the blood, sacrifice, and offering, and of course salvation. In John 19:30 tells us, Christ said, "It is FINISHED." while he was on the cross. He told us, the daily sacrifices and daily offerings are no more and end them. At the same time, the veil in the temple was tore down from top to bottom after Christ yeild up his soul - Mark 15:37-38.

    Before CHrist's death, He said to Jews, He shall destroy this building of the temple, and He shall rise it up in three days - John 2:19. Jews were not understand what Christ talking about. They told him, immpossible to rise it up in three days, they told him, that building of the temple was built for 46 years. John 2:21 - Christ spoken of HIS BODY- the temple.

    Before his death, during Lord's supper. Christ told them about the wine and bread, He said, "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many." -Mark 14:24 Testament means covenant or promise.

    Didn't you realize that we are no longer under the old covenant anymore because of calvary. We are under the new covenant because of His blood by Calvary.

    Premill teaches, the daily offerings and sacrifices shall be restoration in the millennial kingdom. But, premill should know better than that, they should be realized that Christ finished them at the cross - John 19:30. We do not need another future daily sacrifices and offering again any more. Now, Christ is our Lamb, and also temple too. We are the priests. We have right to ask Christ to forgive us our sins daily through his blood all the times 24 hours - 1 John 1:9.

    That why we are under the new covenant right now.

    I urge you to read whole book of Hebrews discuss about the old covenant and new coveant. That book in the New Testament will help you to understand better about the covenant more clear.

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 - Amen!
     
  5. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who says that the offerings will continue in the millennial kingdom? I never read or heard that (which doesn´t have to mean anything). Who preaches that?
     
  6. Bugman

    Bugman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
  7. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Siegfried, my able pupil, NCT is all about the law and salvation and the outworking of the New Covenant. As Pete has said, eschatology isn't an issue. NCT seeks to correct the many injustices of CT.

    The differences are not all that major between NCT and PD.

    The more I read from NCT, the more I see myself as a NCT guy who is pretrib/premill.

    The New Covenant has been cut, is in full force and effect, but still has a future aspect that will incorporate ethnic Jews who will come to Christ.

    NCT actually has alot of similarities with Classical dispensationalism in regards to the mosaic law. The law as given to Moses (including the 10 commandments), has been completely and utterly done away with. None of it remains for believers to follow. I realize many disagree with that, but that is only due to their rebellion to truth.

    - Put away the ranger, become who you were born to be.
     
  8. Siegfried

    Siegfried
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the comments, everyone. They have been helpful.

    Let me ask my question this way: Is anyone aware of any foundational tenets of either NCT or PD that would be mutually exclusive of the foundational tenets of the other? In other words, could a person be both an NCT and a PD at the same time without being inconsistent? If the primary differences are merely eshchatological, would this not seem to be the case?
     
  9. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    NCT doesn't have any eshchatological tenets. Believers in NCT just TEND to be non-pretribulational.
     
  10. Wood

    Wood
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Although this is my first post, and most of your opinion is incorrect. I would like only to respond to this last portion, as quoted above. With your view in mind, how would you explain Jesus' words here:

    Just curious,
    Wood
     
  11. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wood, I always welcome this discussion. It really isn't about what the original post addressed, but here is your answer. If you need more information, please start another thread.

    1. The law is always spoken of as a single law. Now, it addresses religion and civil aspects, but it is still one law that is binding in every aspect. One was required to obey the clothing laws as rigorously as the sacrificial laws. There were no lesser laws.

    2. One change to any one law actually changed the whole thing. If you had a chocolate pie and replaced one slice with a slice of kidney pie, you still have a pie, but it is now different.

    3. Jeremiah 31 promised to make a New covenant NOT LIKE THE ORIGINAL. That means that it changed.

    4. Christ came to fulfill the law. He lived under it, submitted to it, obeyed it, etc., just like Galatians 4 said.

    5. Once he died on the cross though, the veil ripped down the middle, because God was DONE with the old covenant.

    6. If you have any other questions, I refer you to the New Testament.
     
  12. WallDoctor

    WallDoctor
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    This has been a topic I have only heard about recently and I've been looking into it but still know nothing.

    One thing I am not sure about is this issue concerning the law. I thought that NCT taught that both Wood's statement and Daniel Davids last statements were both right.


    Christ came to fulfill the law---the moral law has not been abandoned, but it has changed administrators (from Moses to Christ) and Christ has expounded and demanded more from us concerning the law (Matt 5 concerning not just sin being outward act but inward heart)

    I'm not claiming to know more than I do---this has been a hard thing for me to grasp since I've been taught from a Covenant Theology standpoint and it's been hard to grasp new concepts when previous biases keep trying to define issues.

    But that was the way my mind has defined NCT's view of law and it is different than the reformed position which basically states that Jesus was only stating in Matt 5 what was already taught or implied by Moses Covenant.

    PS... Me New Too
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Walldoctor, great points. If you all don't mind, I will start a new thread on this issue of the Law and New Covenant Theology.
     

Share This Page

Loading...