Sound of Grace, Issue 204, February 2014

thew portrays Jesus as a new Moses.
Matthew portrays
Jesus as the new Moses, who provides the new Israel with
her new law (especially in Mt 5-7).
1
Without doubt, there
are a number of striking parallels in Matthew between Mo-
ses and Christ. Typical is the list adapted from Westerholm
and summarized below:
2
Shortly after birth, both barely escape death at the
hands of a wicked ruler.
Early in life, both spend time in Egypt.
1 Bartholomew; ODowd, Old Testament Wisdom Literature: A
Theological Introduction, 240.
2 Stephen Westerholm, Understanding Matthew (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker, 2006), 68-69.
This is the third study on Christ Our New Covenant King. Some of the
material in this article should have been given in the frst of these studies.
Nearly everyone agrees with most of what we said about Christ as our Prophet
and Priest, but there is great disagreement concerning Christ in the role of
King. The primary reason for the disagreement centers on Dispensationalisms
position on the establishing of a future earthly kingdom with one of Davids
sons sitting on the throne of that kingdom as king. This is referred to as the
Davidic kingdom.
Scripture is quite clear in 2 Samuel 7:1-17 and 1 Chronicles 17:1-15 that God
promised David that he, God, would establish a future kingdom and raise up one
of Davids sons to sit as king on a throne in that kingdom. No one disputes the
fact of that covenant; however, all do not agree on either the nature of the promised kingdom to David or the time of the
promise being fulflled. I would insist that the kingdom promised to David was a spiritual kingdom that was established
by Christ at his frst coming. I believe Christ is already sitting on the throne of that kingdom. The kingdom promised
to David is the Church and Christ is Davids greater son. Classical Dispensationalism
Issue 204 Februar y 2014
It is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace Hebrews 13:9
Christ, Our New Covenant King #3
John G. Reisinger
When we come to the NT, a dominant theme is that of a
progression and fulfllment from OT revelation to the per-
son and work of Christ. Jesus himself told the two disciples
on the road to Emmaus that all the Scriptures spoke of
him (Luke 24:27, cf. Acts 3:24). Jesus was the prophet that
was to come after Moses (Matt. 17:1-8; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37).
The faithful were now to listen to him. The wisdom of the
OT found its fullest expression in the life and words of
Christ. All the promises of the OT era found their fulfll-
ment in Christ (2 Cor. 1:20). Many OT types and shadows
were found to have anticipated Christ. Likewise, many OT
prophecies pointed to Christ in various ways. Here we are
primarily interested in seeing how Christ has become a
more perfect expression of the wisdom of God.
Many writers have emphasized that the gospel of Mat-
Law, Wisdom and Christ
A Study in Biblical TheologyPart 3Christ
Stan F. Vaninger
ReisingerContinued on page 2
VaningerContinued on page 12
In This Issue
Christ, Our New Covenant King
#3
John G. Reisinger
1
Law, Wisdom and Christ, A Study
in Biblical Theology, Part 3, Christ
Stan F. Vaninger
1
Shepherding the New Covenant
Flock: Part 3 of 6
Shepherding Imagery in the OT:
The Lord is my Shepherd
Steve West
3
New Covenant Theology
Questions Answered
A. Blake White
5
Page 2 February 2014 Issue 204
Sound of Grace is a publication of Sovereign
Grace New Covenant Ministries, a tax exempt
501(c)3 corporation. Contributions to Sound
of Grace are deductible under section 170 of
the Code.
Sound of Grace is published 10 times a year.
The subscription price is shown below. This is
a paper unashamedly committed to the truth
of Gods sovereign grace and New Covenant
Theology. We invite all who love these same
truths to pray for us and help us fnancially.
We do not take any paid advertising.
The use of an article by a particular person
is not an endorsement of all that person
believes, but it merely means that we thought
that a particular article was worthy of printing.
Sound of Grace Board: John G. Reisinger,
David Leon, John Thorhauer, Bob VanWing-
erden and Jacob Moseley.
Editor: John G. Reisinger; Phone: (585)396-
3385; e-mail: reisingerjohn@gmail.com.
General Manager: Jacob Moseley:
info@newcovenantmedia.com
Send all orders and all subscriptions to:
Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive,
Frederick, MD 21703-6938 Phone 301-
473-8781 Visit the bookstore: http://www.
newcovenantmedia.com
Address all editorial material and questions
to: John G. Reisinger, 3302 County Road 16,
Canandaigua, NY 14424-2441.
Webpage: www.soundofgrace.org
or SOGNCM.org
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken
from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNA-
TIONAL VERSION Copyright 1973, 1978,
1984 by International Bible Society. Used by
Permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked NKJV are
taken from the New King James Version.
Copyright 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
Used by Permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version,
copyright 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a
division of Good News Publishers. Used by
permission. All rights reserved.
Contributions
Orders
Discover, MasterCard or VISA
If you wish to make a tax-deductible contri-
bution to Sound of Grace, please mail a check
to: Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive,
Frederick, MD 21703-6938.
Please check the mailing label to fnd the
expiration of your subscription. Please send
payment if you want your subscription to
continue$20.00 for ten issues. Or if you
would prefer to have a pdf fle emailed, that is
available for $10.00 for ten issues. If you are
unable to subscribe at this time, please call or
drop a note in the mail and we will be glad to
continue Sound of Grace free of charge.
ReisingerContinued from page 1
disagrees and insists that the kingdom
promised to David was an earthly
kingdom, and it is not yet established.
Jesus is said to have offered that
kingdom to the Jews at his frst
coming, and they rejected it. It was
postponed and will be fulflled in
a future earthly millennium. The
following note in the frst edition of
the Scofeld Bible sets forth classical
Dispensationalisms position on the
Davidic kingdom and throne. The
quotation is listed in the footnote
titled four forms of the Gospel. The
quotation is the frst form mentioned.
II. Four forms of the Gospel are to
be distinguished:
(1) The Gospel of the kingdom.
This is the good news that God
purposes to set up on the earth,
in fulflment of the Davidic
Covenant (2 Sam. vii. 8, and refs.),
a kingdom, political, spiritual,
Israelitish, universal, over which
Gods Son, Davids heir, shall be
King, and which shall be, for one
thousand years, the manifestation
of the righteousness of God in
human affairs.
1

Dispensationalism is clear that
Christ is not yet reigning as king.
These writers will often state that
Christ is our Prophet, Priest and
coming King. The following Scofeld
footnote defning the second form
of the Gospel refers to Jesus as the
rejected king. It is the second of
four forms of the Gospel.
(2) The Gospel of the grace of
God. This is the good news that Jesus
Christ, the rejected King (emphasis
mine), has died on the cross for the
sins of the world, that He was raised
from the dead for our justifcation,
and that by Him all that believe are
justifed from all things.
2
I do not believe that it was a
rejected king that died on the
1 C.I. Scofeld, The First Scofeld Refer-
ence Bible (Westwood, NJ, Barbour
and Company, 1986) 1343.
2 Ibid.
cross for my sins. I totally reject the
statement Jesus Christ, the rejected
King, has died on the cross. It was
not a rejected king that died for me.
This idea is a necessary consequence
of holding the postponement theory.
I believe the death of Christ on the
cross is the good news that Jesus
Christ, not a rejected king, but
Gods anointed Son and ordained
Prophet, Priest and King, has, in
perfect fulfllment of the eternal
purpose and promise of the Father,
died on the cross as promised and
covenanted. It is no accident that
another consequence of rejecting
the present kingship of Christ is the
carnal Christian doctrine. Many
modern dispensationalists reject the
carnal Christian doctrine, but others
say such people are inconsistent in
so doing. I am sure it is not intended,
but Scofeld in the above quotation
makes the cross sound like a plan B
or after-thought. Gods real purpose
and goal, or plan A, was establishing
the earthly kingdom, but the Jews
refused to go along with that, so plan
B, the cross and the Church, was put
into effect. Plan A was postponed
until the second coming of Christ.
The nature of the kingdom and its
supposed rejection and postponement
is at the heart of the theology of
Dispensationalism. It seems to me this
down grades the cross even though
that was certainly not its intention.
It might be good to mention
several things that are often not
discussed when Dispensationalism
is taught. For instance, the footnote
just quoted defnes the kingdom
promised to David as being political,
spiritual, Israelitish, universal, over
which Gods Son, Davids heir, shall
reign as King. If Jesus would have
offered the Jews a kingdom that was
political, spiritual, Israelitish and
universal, they would have accepted
it without hesitation. They would
never have crucifed him. They would
have shouted, Amen! Those words,
Issue 204 February 2014 Page 3
WestContinued on page 18
sheep and fnd homes for thembut
not cars. My fve year old daughter
chimed in that Daniel was a shepherd
and drove away lions and bears by
throwing rocks at them. She then cor-
rected Daniel to David.
All in all I thought that wasnt bad.
A few things struck me about their re-
sponses. First, they have been taught.
They are intelligent (of course!) but
they have also been taught some basic
biblical content which gives them the
necessary framework in which they
can think through an easy biblical
metaphor (without having the faint-
est idea what the word metaphor
means). Second, the imagery seems
very natural and intuitive to them.
Once they have identifed God as the
shepherd and people as his sheep,
the imagery seems to run along very
smoothly. It simply unfolds itself.
Third, although we did not read Psalm
23 or any other biblical passage before
I heard their answers, much of what
they said can easily be found in Psalm
23. Compare the list:
1. God drives away Satan and our
enemies. I will fear no evil. You
prepare a table before me in the pres-
ence of my enemies. Your rod [a
shepherds weapon] and your staff,
they comfort me.
2. God fnds us food to eat and
water to drink. I lack nothing. He
makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters.
3. God provides us with a home.
and I will dwell in the house of the
Lord forever.
4. God watches over us. Surely that
is a fair summary of the ethos of the
psalm.
I believe that Gods people love
This is the Word of the Lord:
The Lord is my shepherd,
I lack nothing.
He makes me lie down in green pas-
tures,
he leads me beside quiet waters,
he refreshes my soul.
He guides me along the right paths
for his names sake.
Even though I walk through the dark-
est valley,
I will fear no evil,
for you are with me;
your rod and your staff, they comfort
me.
You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies.
You anoint my head with oil;
my cup overfows.
Surely your goodness and love
will follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house of the
Lord forever. (Psalm 23 NIV)
Although many people in our
society have never seen a live fock of
sheep being watched over by a shep-
herd, the pastoral image still resonates
in a profoundly deep way. This is true
for both young and old. Just now I was
sitting at the breakfast table with my
two daughters who are seven and fve.
I asked them if they would like to help
me work on an article. They said yes.
I told them I wanted help thinking
about what the Bible means when it
calls God a shepherd. How, I asked,
is God like a shepherd?
My seven-year-old immediately
said that shepherds drive away bears
and wolves from their sheep, and
since were Gods sheep he will drive
away Satan from us so we can be safe.
I asked what else shepherds do. She
thought for a moment and then said
that shepherds care for their sheep and
get them food and water. Then she
added that shepherds watch over their
this imagery becauseas art doesit
allows us to think of God in a symbol-
ic way that touches us deeply in our
hearts without bypassing our intellect.
The general impression the metaphor
creates is one of a strong, competent,
caring overseer watching over and
tending a group that needs help and
is dependent upon their leader. It can
be frightening to consider how many
dangersphysical, emotional, mental,
and spiritualthere are in this world:
if your lot in life is to be a sheep sur-
rounded by wolves, it is quite com-
forting (to say nothing of necessary)
to have an omnicompetent shepherd
around who loves you.
During times of sadness, despair,
confusion, and loss, Psalm 23 can be
a tremendous aid. But the Lord our
shepherd is also a cause for exuberant
rejoicing. Read and feel the celebra-
tory exclamation of praise found in
Psalm 100:
Shout for joy to the Lord, all the earth.
Worship the Lord with gladness; come
before him with joyful songs.
Know that the Lord is God. It is he
who made us, and we are his;
we are his people, the sheep of his
pasture.
Enter his gates with thanksgiving and
his courts with praise;
give thanks to him and praise his
name.
For the Lord is good and his love
endures forever;
his faithfulness continues through all
generations.
Notice that embedded in this psalm
of praise is the imagery of our being
related to God as his sheep. There is
no need for the psalmist to elaborate
on the imagery; there is no extended
discourse or even any sketching out of
other aspects of the metaphor. For the
Shepherding the New Covenant Flock: Part 3 of 6
Shepherding Imagery in the OT: The Lord is my Shepherd
Steve West
especially the word Israeltitish,
perfectly describe the very kind of
kingdom the Jews wanted. Another
point established in the quotation is
that this covenant made with David
has not yet been fulflled. It will be
fulflled when the millennium is
supposedly established. The New
Testament makes it clear the Davidic
kingdom is already established.
The whole subject of an earthly
kingdom would be much easier to
understand if we remembered one
clear fact. The whole idea of an
earthly kingdom and king to rule
over Israel was born out of Israels
rebellion to God. The frst mention
of an earthly kingdom is found in 1
Samuel 8. Israel insisted they wanted
to be like the other nations and have
a king. Their desire for a king was a
deliberate rejection of God as their
king.
So all the elders of Israel gathered
together and came to Samuel at
Ramah. They said to him, You are
old, and your sons do not follow your
ways; now appoint a king to lead us,
such as all the other nations have.
But when they said, Give us a king to
lead us, this displeased Samuel; so
he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord
told him: Listen to all that the people
are saying to you; it is not you they
have rejected, but they have rejected
me as their king (1 Sam. 8:4-7).
God instructed Samuel to warn the
Israelites of the demands that a king
would make of them and told them
that they would be sorry for rejecting
him as their king.
As they have done from the day I
brought them up out of Egypt until this
day, forsaking me and serving other
gods, so they are doing to you. Now
listen to them; but warn them solemnly
and let them know what the king who
will reign over them will claim as his
rights. Samuel told all the words
of the Lord to the people who were
asking him for a king. He said, This
is what the king who will reign over
you will claim as his rights: He will
take your sons and make them serve
with his chariots and horses, and they
will run in front of his chariots. Some
he will assign to be commanders of
thousands and commanders of ffties,
and others to plow his ground and
reap his harvest, and still others to
make weapons of war and equipment
for his chariots. He will take your
daughters to be perfumers and cooks
and bakers. He will take the best of
your felds and vineyards and olive
groves and give them to his attendants.
He will take a tenth of your grain
and of your vintage and give it to his
offcials and attendants. Your male
and female servants and the best of
your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take
for his own use. He will take a tenth
of your focks, and you yourselves
will become his slaves. When that day
comes, you will cry out for relief from
the king you have chosen, but the Lord
will not answer you in that day (1
Sam. 8:8-18).
The people refused to heed Gods
warning but insisted that they wanted
a king. They wanted to be like
all the other nations. They chose
Saul as their king and suffered the
disastrous results. Regardless of what
millennial view you hold it must take
into account the fact that an earthly
king over Gods people is an earthly
kingdom like the other nations
and is born out of Israels conscious
and deliberate rejection of God as
their king. There is no mention or
intimation that God desired an earthly
king to be established. The idea
totally originated in Israels rejection
of God as their king.
But the people refused to listen to
Samuel. No! they said. We want a
king over us. Then we will be like all
the other nations, with a king to lead
us and to go out before us and fght
our battles. When Samuel heard all
that the people said, he repeated it
before the Lord. The Lord answered,
Listen to them and give them a
king (1 Sam. 8:19-22).
In 1 Samuel 12, Samuel recounts
some of Israels history and reminds
them of their rash decision to reject
God as their king and choose an
earthly king to rule over them,
you said unto me, Nay; but a king
shall rule over us: when the Lord your
God was your king (1 Sam. 12:12). It
seems to me that any doctrine that has
its origins in mans rebellion should at
least make us tread lightly. We surely
should not use something born out
of rebellion to God as the foundation
points of an important doctrine.
I am sure that many of my readers
would like to ask, Why would God
deliberately allow Israel to choose
an earthly king and reject him as
their king. I cannot answer that
question nor can anyone else. We may
speculate and come up with some
very plausible reasons, but they would
all be mere speculation. We face two
dangers in seeking to understand
Scripture. One, we need the courage
to follow Scripture as far as it goes
on any subject. We must neither avoid
nor minimize anything Scripture says.
Many sincere people feel a subject
should be avoided if it is controversial.
That is saying that God put something
in Scripture that should not be there.
If God put something in Scripture, we
must seek to understand it. Two, we
need the humility to stop where God
stops. Hyper-Calvinism uses human
logic to deduce more than Scripture
actually says. John Calvin emphasized
this need for humility when
discussing predestination. He said
we must admit to having a learned
ignorance. Logic is a wonderful
handmaid but a hard master. Logic
cannot deduce truth that is not stated
in actual texts of Scripture. It is just
as arrogant to add our human wisdom
to Scripture as it is to detract from
Scripture.
The kingship of David begins
with his secret anointing by Samuel
as recorded in 1 Samuel 16. That is
an interesting passage. God instructs
Samuel to anoint one of Jesse the
1. What is New Covenant Theol-
ogy (NCT)?
New Covenant Theology (here-
after NCT) is a biblicaltheological
system that strives to use biblical
language when possible, takes the pro-
gressive nature of revelation seriously,
and sees the new covenant as the goal
and climax of the previous biblical
covenants. In What is New Covenant
Theology, I have briefy mapped out
seven essential points:
1. One plan of God centered in
Jesus Christ
2. The Old Testament should be
interpreted in light of the New Testa-
ment
3. The Old Covenant was tempo-
rary by divine design
4. The Law is a unit
5. Christians are not under the Law
of Moses but the Law of Christ
6. All members of the New Cov-
enant community have the Holy Spirit
7. The church Is the eschatological
Israel
If the reader is aware of the other
two major systems of theology, they
will see that some of these points ft
within Covenant Theology (hereafter
CT), while others ft more within Dis-
pensational Theology (hereafter DT),
but taken together, these points make
up a unique system of theology.
2. How does New Covenant The-
ology differ from Covenant Theol-
ogy (CT)?
With so many different theolo-
gians, who bring their own nuances,
it is hard to paint with a broad brush
without mischaracterizing at least
some, but generally speaking the main
differences between NCT and CT are
four:
First, CT sees more continuity
across the canon than NCT does. With
their theological category of cove-
nant of grace, CT tends to fatten out
the biblical covenants. Specifcally,
it tends to reduce the new covenant
merely to a renewed covenant. When
Jeremiah prophesied of a new cov-
enant, he was explicitly clear: This
one will not be like the covenant I
made with their ancestors when I took
them by the hand to bring them out of
the land of Egypt (Jer. 31:32 HCSB;
cf. Ezek. 16:61). The new covenant
will not be like the old one. It will be
different, radically so. CT is correct in
seeing redemptive history structured
around two covenants but wrong in
identifying them as the socalled
covenant of grace and covenant
of works. There is one plan of God
centered in and on the Messiah, struc-
tured around two covenantsthe old
and the new. One pointing to Him; the
other ratifed by Him.
Second and related, NCT dif-
fers from CTs view of the nature of
the new covenant community. If the
new covenant is different from the
old covenant, so are the correspond-
ing communities of those covenants.
Again, Jeremiah 31 is clear; in the
new covenant, no longer will a cov-
enant member say to another covenant
member Know the Lord, for every
member of the covenant community
will have circumcised hearts (Deut.
30:6, Ezek. 36:25-27). They will all
know the Lord. In short, the new
covenant community is a regenerate
community, unlike Israel, who was
a mixed community of the faithful
remnant and the stiff-necked idolaters.
Both the faithful and the idolatrous
received the covenant sign. Building
on the frst difference, this is where
Pentecost brings discontinuity. The
permanent indwelling of the Holy
Spirit in every member of the new
covenant community is new. So in
John we read, Those who believed
in Jesus were going to receive the
Spirit, for the Spirit had not yet been
received because Jesus had not yet
been glorifed (John 7:39, cf 14:16-17,
16:7). Clearly, the Spirit had not yet
been given before Pentecost. Israels
experience of the Spirit was not the
same as the churchs (Num. 11:29, Joel
2:28-29, Isa. 32:15, 44:3).
Third and related still, NCT differs
from CT on the relationship between
the church and Israel. It is not quite
right to say that the church is Israel
and Israel is the church. Scripture
doesnt make that straightforward,
unmediated type of connection. The
pattern is not Israel = Church, but
Israel = Messiah = Church. Galatians
3:29 reads, If you belong to Christ,
then you are Abrahams seed, heirs
according to the promise. There is an
eschatological difference between Is-
rael and the church. The new covenant
is new. Again, this also has implica-
tions for the nature of the new cov-
enant community. To be a part of this
new covenant community, one must
be united to Christ, the instrument of
which is faith. If being in Christ, the
singular seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16),
WhiteContinued on page 7
New Covenant TheologyQuestions Answered
A. Blake White
in a palace of cedar, while the ark of
God remains in a tent. Nathan replied
to the king, Whatever you have in mind,
go ahead and do it, for the Lord is with
you. That night the word of the Lord
came to Nathan, saying: Go and tell my
servant David, This is what the Lord
says: Are you the one to build me a house
to dwell in? I have not dwelt in a house
from the day I brought the Israelites
up out of Egypt to this day. I have been
moving from place to place with a tent
as my dwelling. Wherever I have moved
with all the Israelites, did I ever say to
any of their rulers whom I commanded
to shepherd my people Israel, Why
have you not built me a house of cedar?
Now then, tell my servant David, This
is what the Lord Almighty says: I took you
from the pasture and from following the
fock to be ruler over my people Israel.
I have been with you wherever you have
gone, and I have cut off all your enemies
from before you. Now I will make your
name great, like the names of the greatest
men of the earth. And I will provide a
place for my people Israel and will plant
them so that they can have a home of
their own and no longer be disturbed.
Wicked people will not oppress them
anymore, as they did at the beginning and
have done ever since the time I appointed
leaders over my people Israel. I will
also give you rest from all your enemies.
The Lord declares to you that the Lord
himself will establish a house for you:
When your days are over and you rest
with your fathers, I will raise up your
offspring to succeed you, who will come
from your own body, and I will establish
his kingdom. He is the one who will build
a house for my Name, and I will establish
the throne of his kingdom forever. I
will be his father, and he will be my
son. When he does wrong, I will punish
him with the rod of men, with foggings
inficted by men. But my love will never
be taken away from him, as I took it away
from Saul, whom I removed from before
you. Your house and your kingdom will
endure forever before me; your throne
will be established forever. Nathan
reported to David all the words of this
entire revelation (2 Sam 7:1-17 NIV).
The heart of Gods covenant with
David is found in verse 13: He is the
one who will build a house for my
Name, and I will establish the throne
Bethelemites sons as king. Samuel
assumes it would be Eliab, the oldest
son. Samuel thought, Surely, the
Lords anointed is before him, but
God said no and then gave Samuel a
lesson on choosing leadership.
Do not consider his
appearance or his height, for I have
rejected him. The Lord does not look
at the things people look at. People
look at the outward appearance, but
the Lord looks at the heart (1 Sam
16:7).
You would think that Israel would
have learned the folly of judging by
outward appearance. Saul won the
beauty contest by unanimous vote,
but he was a dud. He was not Gods
man. Jesse brought in every son until
only David was left, and each time
God said no. Jesse did not even bring
in David. Samuel had to ask, Are
there no more sons? Then David
was brought in, and God told Samuel,
Thats my man. It will be a long
and tumultuous time before David is
anointed king by all of Israel. After
Sauls death he will be anointed by the
tribe of Judah (2 Samuel 2) and later
by all 12 tribes (2 Samuel 5).
The next important event in
Davids kingship is God making a
covenant with David. It is recorded in
2 Samuel 7 and I Chronicles 17. David
has been anointed king over all Israel.
He wants to build a house for God to
dwell in. He shares his desire with
Nathan the prophet, and Nathan says,
Go ahead, God is with you. That
night God told Nathan that he did
not want David to build him a house.
God then promises to build a house
for David. That house is the Church
and Davids greater son who will
build the house is Christ. That is not
speculation on my part; it is quoting
the New Testament interpretation of
the Davidic covenant.
After the king was settled in his
palace and the Lord had given him rest
from all his enemies around him, he said
to Nathan the prophet, Here I am, living
of his kingdom forever. Hebrews 3:6
specifcally calls the Church Gods
house, But Christ is faithful as a
son over Gods house. And we are
his house, Believers are the true
and fnal temple of God in which
God dwells. We are the true house of
David. Christ is Davids greater son
and is building the true house of God
out of living stones. Again, this is
not speculation; it is quoting the New
Testament. In 2 Samuel 7:12 part of
the promise to David was that God
would raise up thy seed after thee.
When Peter quotes that text in Acts
2:30, he changes the word seed to
the word Christ, he would raise
up Christ (Davids seed) to sit on his
throne.
Look at the two texts: When your
days are over and you rest with your
fathers, I will raise up your offspring
(seed KJV) to succeed you, (2
Samuel 7:12 NIV). Therefore being a
prophet, and knowing that God had
sworn with an oath to him, that of the
fruit of his loins, according to the fesh,
he would raise up Christ to sit on his
throne; (Acts 2:30 KJV).
David understood that God was
talking about Christ. David also
understood that when God said he
would set up thy seed after thee (2
Samuel 7:12), he was talking about
the resurrection of Christ. Again,
this is quoting the New Testament
Scriptures. Peter is interpreting
the Davidic covenant recorded in 2
Samuel 7.
Therefore being a prophet, and
knowing that God had sworn with
an oath to him, that of the fruit of his
loins, according to the fesh, he would
raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
He seeing this before spake of the
resurrection of Christ, that his soul
was not left in hell, neither his fesh
did see corruption. This Jesus hath
God raised up, whereof we all are
witnesses (Acts 2:30-32 KJV).
This covenant was the basis for
Davids hope in both life and death.
is what constitutes membership in the
end-time Israel, then faith is neces-
sarywhich infants cannot exercise.
The church consists of believers only.
Fourth and fnally, NCT differs
from CT on the notion of law. Re-
formed Baptists would mostly agree
on the previous three disagreements,
but it is this issue that separates Re-
formed Baptists from New Covenant
Theologians. The confessions where
CT is found (viz. Westminster and the
Second London of 1689), force CT to
hold the Decalogue as Gods eternal
moral law. NCT sees the Decalogue
as part of the old covenant law, which
Christians are no longer under. Since
nine of the Ten Commandments are
repeated in the New Testament, they
pose no problem. The Sabbath, how-
ever, does. It seems to us that the New
Testament is clear that Christians are
no longer under the Sabbath, and we
see no exegetical warrant for changing
the original commandment to make
six days of work optional or chang-
ing it to Sunday. Rather, Hebrews 3-4
shows that the Sabbath has been ful-
flled by rest in Christ (cf. Matt 11:28-
12:8). In one of the most shocking
passages in the New Testament, Paul
said that to return to the Sabbath was
to return to enslavement to paganism
(Gal. 4:8-10). He said the Sabbath was
a shadow, but the body is Christ (Col.
2:16-17), and even went so far as to
say one should do whatever their own
mind was convinced of (Rom. 14:5),
a far cry from Exodus 20:8 on any
reading.
Those who seek to enforce the
Sabbath on new covenant Christians
would do well to heed Pauls teach-
ing and warnings on this very matter.
His rebuke is sharp. In fairness, I do
realize that most CT advocates are
not seeking to enforce the Sabbath
on Christians. In fact, most live life
on the weekends just like I do. But it
must be pointed out that this is incon-
sistent with their theology. For CT,
the Sabbath, being one of the cher-
ished Ten, is on the same moral level
as adultery and murder, but when is
the last time you heard of a church
member being disciplined over break-
ing the Sabbath? NCTs theological
formulations are more consistent with
CTs practice on this point.
ology differ from Dispensational
Theology (DT)?
NCT is further from DT than it is
from CT. Though more could be said,
the main differences are three-fold:
First, I think the fundamental
difference between NCT and Dis-
pensational Theology (DT) is herme-
neutics. DT attempts to maintain a
literal reading of the promises in the
Old Testament. NCT seek more of a
literary hermeneutic, allowing Jesus
and His apostles to teach us how to
approach and interpret the Old Testa-
ment. NCT sees DTs literal Old
Testament hermeneutic as a failure to
fully appreciate the progressive nature
of Scripture. Sometimes DT accuses
NCT of spiritualizing certain Old
Testament promises, but NCT coun-
ters that it takes the Apostles liter-
ally when they literally spiritualize
the Old Testament (e.g. Joel 2:28-32 in
Acts 2:14-21 or Amos 9:11-12 in Acts
15:12-21 to name two of many). Liter-
alism makes for a good slogan but is
impossible to carry out consistently.
NCT reads the old in light of the new.
This, of course, is an anathema to
DT and has some major theological
implications.
Second, NCT denies DTs sharp
distinction between Israel and the
church. This difference is particularly
manifested in the churchs relationship
to the new covenant. NCT sees the
new covenant as for the churchthose
in Christ, the inaugurator of the new
covenant. DT sees the new covenant
for ethnic Israel in the future. NCT,
like CT, rejects DTs sharp distinction
between Israel and the church. This is
related to their view of the kingdom as
wholly future, even positing that Jesus
is not currently sitting on the Davidic
throne.
Thankfully, DT has made adjust-
ments. Largely due to George Eldon
Ladds popularizing of inaugurated
eschatology, academic theologians
have in large part abandoned tradi-
tional DT. Now, many have adopted
Progressive Dispensationalism. But
according to Ryrie and many other
traditional Dispensationalist theolo-
gians, Progressive Dispensational-
ism can no longer truly be called
Dispensational (notice how Ryrie
changed the title of his 1966 book
Dispensationalism Today to Dispen-
sationalismimplied now and forev-
ermorewhen it was revised in 2007).
Progressive DT sees the church as
sharing only in the spiritual aspects of
Israels new covenant. So the church
receives forgiveness of sins and the
gift of the Holy Spirit, but the gist of
the new covenant will not fnd fulfll-
ment until the millennium with ethnic
Israel.
Third, NCT differs with DT with
regard to typology. Most of the dif-
ferences between NCT and DT stand
on the land promise. In the opinion
of NCT, DT fails to see the typologi-
cal nature of the land promise, which
fnds fulfllment by being in Christ
rather than in the land now and will
fnd ultimate fulfllment on a reno-
vated earth at the resurrection (Rom.
4:13, 8:18ff, Rev. 21-22). The same
goes for the typology of the temple.
4. Is New Covenant Theology a
brand new innovation, or can it be
found throughout church history?
The label NCT is a relatively
new innovation, but one can fnd as
much exegetical evidence for this way
of putting the canon together as one
can fnd for CT or DT. I would actual-
ly argue more evidence, though more
work needs to be done. One neither
WhiteContinued from page 5
He spells this out in 2 Samuel 23:5,
his last words. David rejoices that God
made:
...an everlasting covenant, arranged
and secured in every part? Will he
not bring to fruition my salvation and
grant me my every desire? (2 Samuel
23:5 NIV).
Matthew Henry has some excellent
comments on this text.
God has made a covenant of
grace with us in Jesus Christ, and
we are here told, First, That it is an
everlasting covenant, from everlasting
in the contrivance and counsel of it,
and to everlasting in the continuance
and consequences of it. Secondly,
That it is ordered, well ordered in all
things, admirably well, to advance the
glory of God and the honour of the
Mediator, together with the holiness
and comfort of believers. It is herein
well ordered, that whatever is required
in the covenant is promised, and that
every transgression in the covenant
does not throw us out of covenant,
and that it puts our salvation, not in
our own keeping, but in the keeping
of a Mediator. Thirdly, That it is
sure, and therefore sure because well
ordered; the general offer of it is
sure; the promised mercies are sure
on the performance of the conditions.
The particular application of it to
true believers is sure; it is sure to all
the seed. Fourthly, That it is all our
salvation. Nothing but this will save
us, and this is suffcient: it is this only
upon which our salvation depends.
Fifthly, That therefore it must be all
our desire. Let me have an interest in
this covenant and the promises of it,
and I have enough, I desire no more.
3

The New Testament immediately
announces that Jesus would inherit
the Davidic throne and kingdom.
When the angel spoke to the Virgin
Mary she was confused. Part of the
angels message concerned Jesus
receiving the throne of the kingdom
3 Matthew Henry, www.biblegate-
way.com/resources/matthew-
henry/2Sam.23.1-2Sam.23.7 (Ac-
cessed 12/19/2013).
promised to his father David.
Mary was greatly troubled at his
words and wondered what kind of
greeting this might be. But the angel
said to her, Do not be afraid, Mary,
you have found favor with God. You
will be with child and give birth to a
son, and you are to give him the name
Jesus. He will be great and will be
called the Son of the Most High. The
Lord God will give him the throne of
his father David, and he will reign
over the house of Jacob forever; his
kingdom will never end (Luke 1:29-
33 NIV).
Acts 2 is a crucial passage. Like
most key passages, it is also very
controversial. The frst section records
the coming of the Holy Spirit and the
subsequent speaking in tongues. The
unbelieving Jews said those speaking
in tongues were drunk (Acts 2: 1-13).
Peter shows that the event was the
fulfllment of two Old Testament
prophecies. First, the promise of the
Gospel and establishing the kingdom
promised in the prophet Joel (Act 2:
14-21). Second the promise to David
(2 Samuel 7) to raise one of his sons
from the dead and crown him as king
over an eternal kingdom (2 Samuel 7:
22-36).
We will begin looking at Acts
2:14. This is Peters response to the
unbelieving Jews accusation that
those speaking in tongues were drunk
with wine. In verses 14 and 15 Peter
assures them that those speaking in
tongues were not drunk.
Then Peter stood up with the
Eleven, raised his voice and addressed
the crowd: Fellow Jews and all of
you who live in Jerusalem, let me
explain this to you; listen carefully to
what I say. These men are not drunk,
as you suppose. Its only nine in the
morning! (Acts 2:14-15 NIV).
In verses 16-21, Peter says the
phenomenon of tongues was an
evidence of a prophecy that was made
by the prophet Joel is being fulflled.
It is clear that Peter spiritualized Joels
prophecy. Peter defnitely understood
that the kingdom prophesied in Joel
was fulflled on the day of Pentecost.
The gift of the Holy Spirit was the
proof that Christ was enthroned
in heaven on Davids throne, and
the promised kingdom had come.
There is no way you can take Peters
interpretation literally without
seeing that he spiritualized Joels
prophecy.
No, this is what was spoken by the
prophet Joel: [this is that cannot
mean anything but this is that.
JGR]
In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will
prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
Even on my servants, both men
and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
I will show wonders in the heaven
above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fre and billows of smoke.
The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and
glorious day of the Lord.
And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved
(Acts 2:16-21 NIV).
Dispensationalism cannot
spiritualize kingdom promises and
must therefore insist the events
of Pentecost are only a type or
prefguring of the kingdom promised
in Joel. In that system, the words
this is that which was spoken by
Peter must be understood to mean
that Pentecost is not a fulfllment
of Joels prophecy but only a
prefguring of what will happen when
Christ, in the future, establishes
the Davidic (millennial) kingdom.
John MacArthur is typical of
Dispensational writers. Here are two
quotations from his study Bible. The
fnds the language of CT or DT in the
Patristics, but one fnds many similar-
ities to NCT in their writing. Consider
the way Irenaeus of Lyons and Justin
Martyr spoke of the newness of the
new covenant. Justin speaks of a new
law, the true spiritual Israel, and
even calls Jesus a new lawgiver (see
chapter 11 of Dialogue with Trypho).
The exegesis of the golden-mouth
preacher, John Chrysostom, also lines
up nicely with the key tenets of NCT
(see his Galatians commentary, for in-
stance). Moving right past the Middle
Ages (as we all do; again, more work
to be done), one fnds much to glean
from Martin Luther. Luther would
often de-historicize law to merely
refer to Gods demand, missing the
redemptive-historical nature of the
New Testament teaching on law, but
many NCT folks will shout a hearty
amen as they read through his How
Christians Should Regard Moses
(1525), as well as his work on Romans
and Galatians. Doug Moo, who now
identifes himself as NCT, previously
referred to his view as a modifed
Lutheran view. One also fnds the
roots of the hermeneutic of NCT in
the Evangelical Anabaptists. Long
before his time, Pilgram Marpeck
grasped the progressive nature of
Gods revelation and referred to the
old covenant as yesterday and the
new covenant as today.
5. What is the broad Scriptural
case for New Covenant Theology?
I would argue that NCT is the
system that has the least amount of
problem passages that do not ft
within the system. Dispensationalism
has trouble with the warp and woof
of the New Testament. What I mean
by this is that it is at odds with one
of the central messages of the New
Testament, namely the unity of Jews
and Gentiles in Christ. The book of
Acts, Ephesians, Romans, and Ga-
latians come readily to mind. When
DT wants to sharply distinguish Jews
and Gentiles and the New Testament
preaches another message, thats prob-
lematic. I think CT has trouble with
Galatians in particular, where there
is a clear difference between the old
covenant and the Abrahamic covenant
(again, I do realize that some strands
of CT are better than others here, e.g.
Westminster West vis--vis Westmin-
ster East). They also struggle with the
passages on the fulfllment of the Sab-
bath mentioned in question 2.
Constructively, NCT sees the
promise of the obsolescence of the old
covenant within the Old Testament
itself. This is the argument of He-
brews. Notice how the author shows
from the Old Testament itself that
something new was needed (Ps. 8, 95,
110, Jer. 31). The argument of the ser-
mon could be summarized as Dont
go back. Jesus is better! Your own
Scriptures pointed to Him! A couple
crucial passages are Hebrews 7:11-12
and chapter 8. The former explicitly
says that the people received the law
under the priesthood. Law and priest-
hood go together since the law is a
unit (another key NCT tenet). The tri-
partite division of the law into moral,
ceremonial, and civil is a product of
Thomas Aquinas, not biblical exege-
sis. Then the preacher to the Hebrews
says For when there is a change in
the priesthood, there must be a change
of law as well (I should add that the
ESV botches this one, inexcusably
translating genitives as datives). NCT
is not making this stuff up. There was
a change of law (contra CT). In the
next chapter, the author includes the
longest Old Testament quotation in
the New Testament to say that the new
covenant promised long ago has now
been instituted. He applies Jeremiahs
promise to the church (contra DT).
Second Corinthians 3 says much the
same.
Another favorite letter for NCT is
Galatians, our Katie Von Bora (let the
reader understand). Here the Apostle
is crystal clear about such things as
the temporary nature of the law. It had
a defnite starting point (430 years
after the promise to Abraham) and a
defnite ending point (when Messiah/
faith came). The law functioned like a
babysitter for Israel, but once adult-
hood has come, it is no longer needed.
Galatians is also clear on the oneness
of Jews and Gentiles in Jesus. Those
who have faiththat is, the church
are Abrahams Sonsthat is, Israel
(Gal.3:7). At the end of the letter, Paul
summarizes his message. He lays out
the rule of the new creation: neither
circumcision nor uncircumcision
matters. Then he wishes a blessing of
peace and mercy on all who follow
that rule: the Israel of God (Gal. 6:15-
16). Based on the context of the book,
the Israel of God here is clearly all
who fnd themselves in Christ by faith
since there is no Jew or Greek for
you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal.
3:28).
Another key passage for NCT is
1 Corinthians 9:20-21: To the Jews
I became like a Jew, to win Jews; to
those under the law, like one under the
lawthough I myself am not under the
law-- to win those under the law. To
those who are without that law, like
one without the law-- not being with-
out Gods law but within Christs law
to win those without the law. Here,
Paul says that Gods law can no longer
be equated with the Mosaic law. He
is not under the old covenant law, but
that does not mean he is autonomous.
To be law-less is not to be lawless; to
be without law is not to be an outlaw.
No, he is under Gods lawin-lawed to
Messiah.
So NCT strives to read Scripture
on its own terms. Much more could
be said, and since many passages have
been pointed to, I hope one can get a
feel for the exegetical foundation for
NCT. For the curious-minded, books
abound (for starters see Reisingers
Abrahams Four Seeds, Meyers
End of the Law, Moos entry in Five
frst quotation is from the introduction
to the book of Joel and the second one
is from Acts 2.
A second issue confronting the
interpreter is Peters quotation from
Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:16-21. Some
have viewed the phenomena of Acts
2 and the destruction of Jerusalem
A.D. 70 as the fulfllment of the Joel
passage, while others have reserved
its fulfllment to the fnal Day of the
Lord onlybut clearly Joel is referring
to the fnal terrible Day of the Lord.
The pouring out of the Holy Spirit
at Pentecost is not a fulfllment, but
a preview and sample of the Spirits
power and work, to be released fully
and fnally in the Messiahs kingdom
after the Day of the Lord.
4

Joels prophecy will not be
completely fulflled until the
millennial kingdom and the fnal
judgment. But Peter by using it, shows
that Pentecost was a pre-fulfllment,
a taste of what will happen in the
millennial kingdom when the Spirit is
poured out on all fesh
5
Peter next gives us the New
Covenant fulfllment of the covenant
made with David in 2 Samuel 7.
He frst shows that Christ had all
the credentials to prove that he was
Davids greater son to whom the
kingdom promises had been made.
Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus
of Nazareth was a man accredited
by God to you by miracles, wonders
and signs, which God did among you
through him, as you yourselves know
(Acts 2:22 NIV).
Despite the fact that Jesus gave
ample proof that he was Davids
son who was the heir to the Davidic
throne and kingdom, the Jews still
crucifed him, but God raised him
from the dead as prophesied in the
Davidic covenant.
This man was handed over
4 John MacArthur, ed., The MacArthur
Study Bible (Nashville: Word Publish-
ing, 1997), 1268.
5 Ibid., 1635.
to you by Gods set purpose and
foreknowledge; and you, with the
help of wicked men, put him to death
by nailing him to the cross. But God
raised him from the dead, freeing him
from the agony of death, because it
was impossible for death to keep its
hold on him (Acts 2:23-24 NIV).
Peter assures us that David died
in the sure hope that not only would
he be raised from the dead, but one
of his sons would be the Messiah
who establishes the eternal kingdom
promised to Davids greater son.
David said about him:
I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
Therefore my heart is glad and my
tongue rejoices;
my body also will live in hope,
because you will not abandon me
to the grave,
nor will you let your Holy One see
decay.
You have made known to me the
paths of life;
you will fll me with joy in your
presence (Acts 2:25-28 NIV).
The next few verses give us the
Holy Spirits interpretation of how
David understood the covenant that
God made with him.
Brothers, I can tell you
confdently that the patriarch David
died and was buried, and his tomb is
here to this day (Acts 2:29 NIV).
Why would Peter emphasize that
David was dead and buried? Because
the covenant to raise up one of his
sons and seat him on the throne of an
eternal kingdom was to be fulflled
while David slept with the fathers!
See 2 Samuel 7:12 and 1 Chronicles
17:11. The Davidic kingdom was to be
established with a resurrected Christ
but BEFORE David was resurrected.
Davids son would be raised from
the dead and the kingdom would be
established while David slept with
the fathers. He is still sleeping in
the grave and will remain there until
the second coming. Again, this is not
idle speculation. David understood
this timing of the establishing of the
kingdom. Read the following verses
carefully. It is impossible to read a
future earthly kingdom into Peters
words. Peter specifcally identifes the
time of David assuming the kingship
of the kingdom was at the resurrection
of Christ while David was still in the
grave. It is defnitely pastnot future.
It happened when Davids greater son
was raised from the dead and David
was still dead and buried. The whole
argument of verses 30-34 hinges
on the fact that the resurrection of
Christ, not the resurrection of David,
established the kingdom to David
concerning one of his sons. Follow
Peters argument carefully in verses
30-35. Note how clearly Peter shows
that the Davidic covenant has been
fulflled, and Davids greater son is
presently seated in heaven on the
Davidic throne. There is a not a hint
of an earthly future kingdom.
But he was a prophet and knew
that God had promised him on
oath that he would place one of his
descendants on his throne. Seeing
what was ahead, he spoke of the
resurrection of the Christ, [The
Davidic covenant promised that one
of Davids sons, not David, would
be raised from the dead and seated
on a throne. The establishing of this
throne and kingdom would take place
at the resurrection of Christ and not at
a supposed future millennium when
David will be raised from the dead]
that he was not abandoned to the
grave, nor did his body see decay.
God has raised this Jesus [not David]
to life, and we are all witnesses of the
fact. Exalted to the right hand of God
[This cannot be referring to David
since he is not exalted at the Fathers
right hand. David has not ascended
to heaven], he has received from the
Father the promised Holy Spirit and
has poured out what you now see and
hear. For David did not ascend to
heaven, and yet he said,
Views on Law and Gospel, Wells and
Zaspels New Covenant Theology,
and Wellum and Gentrys Kingdom
Through Covenant).
ology view the Christians relation-
ship to the Old Testament Law?
Paul is crystal clear that believ-
ers are not under the law. By law,
98% of the time, Paul means Mosaic
law-covenant. For him, and all frst
century Jews, the law was a package
deal. A careful reading of Exodus
19-24 bears this out. The words of
Exodus 20 and the ordinances of
Exodus 21-23 constitute the book of
the Covenant (Ex. 24:3-7). One cannot
extrapolate the commands from the
covenant in which they were given.
The old covenant and its law have
been replaced by the new covenant.
Paul is fond of making contrasting al-
ternatives. Geerhardus Vos was right
to say that these contrasts are part of
the substructure of Pauls theology.
The various contrasts (law/Spirit, sin/
righteousness, fesh/Spirit, death/life,
etc) can be summarized under Adam
and the Last Adam. Adam is the head
of the old age. The last Adam is the
head of the new age. In the equation
of redemptive history, Paul lumps the
law on the Adam side. This is why he
begins the letter to the Galatians the
way he does. Recall that the funda-
mental issue is false teachers trying to
force Gentile Christians to obey the
law. He begins by saying that Jesus
has delivered us from the present evil
age (Gal. 1:4) and ends the letter men-
tioning the new creation (Gal. 6:15).
The Judaizers were confused about
what time it was in redemptive his-
tory; their eschatological time-clocks
were in need of fresh batteries.
This is also why Paul can say what
he does in Romans 6:14. In context,
Paul is teaching on our victory over
sin through union with Christ. You
would think hed conclude the sec-
tion with, For sin will not rule over
you, because you are not under sin
but under grace. But he doesnt; he
writes, For sin will not rule over you,
because you are not under law but
under grace. Remember that Paul
has just feshed out the representative
natures of Adam and Christ a chapter
earlier (Rom. 5:12-21). For Paul, being
under law is eschatologically old (see
Jason Meyers book The End of the
Law on this point).
In sum, one cannot improve
on Pauls words in Romans 7:4-6:
Therefore, my brothers, you also
were put to death in relation to the
law through the crucifed body of the
Messiah, so that you may belong to
another to Him who was raised from
the deadthat we may bear fruit for
God. For when we were in the fesh,
the sinful passions operated through
the law in every part of us and bore
fruit for death. But now we have been
released from the law, since we have
died to what held us, so that we may
serve in the new way of the Spirit and
not in the old letter of the law.
I hasten to add that this does not
entail that NCT is antinomian. There
are some 2,000 imperatives in the
New Testament, and if anything, its
moral vision is amplifedtargeting
the heart (see the antitheses of Jesus
Sermon on the Mount). Christians are
bound to the example of Christ, the
teaching of Christ and His Apostles
(supremely in the love command), and
the Old Testament interpreted and ap-
plied in light of the new covenant. But
centrally, new covenant Christians are
commanded to walk and be led by the
Spirit (Gal.5, 2 Cor. 3).
7. What is New Covenant The-
ologys view of the relationship of
Israel to the Church?
See Questions 2 and 3 above. In
short, the church is the eschatological
Israel by virtue of union with Israels
Messiah. Jesus sums up Israels his-
tory, is the singular seed of Abraham,
and all the promises of God fnd their
yes in him (Gal.3:16, 2 Cor. 1:20).
Those in faith-union with Christ are
co-heirs. The message of the New
Testament is univocal on this point:
Those who have faith are Abrahams
sons (Gal. 3:7). There is no longer
Jew or Gentile, but all are sons of God
through faith since if you belong to
Christ you are Abrahams seed, heirs
according to promise (Gal. 3:26-29).
Abraham is now the Father of all
who believe (Rom. 4:12, 16, cf. 1 Cor.
10:1). Believers are those whose moth-
er is the free woman, the Jerusalem
above, and it is they who are children
of promise, like Isaac (Gal. 4:21-31).
The church is the community of the
new creation, the new Israel, who fol-
lows the rule that ethnicity no longer
matters (Gal. 6:16). Gentiles were
without the Messiah but are now in
Him by faith, included in the citizen-
ship of Israel (Eph. 2:11-12, 19). Jesus
made Jews and Gentile one by tearing
down the law in his fesh, creating in
Himself one new humanity out of the
two (Eph. 2:14-15). The circumci-
sion are believersthose who serve
by the Spirit, boast in Christ, and put
no confdence in the fesh (Phil. 3:3).
In the new covenant, a person is not
a Jew by virtue of anything external
but internally by having their heart
circumcised by the Spirit (Rom. 2:28-
29).
8. Dispensationalists are premi-
llennial, Covenant Theologians are
generally amillennial or postmillen-
nial. Does New Covenant Theology
have a particular eschatological
commitment?
NCT does not entail or require a
particular view of the millennium. It
is unfortunate that people typically
think immediately of the timing of
the rapture and the millennium when
one speaks of eschatology. There is so
much more!! NCT focuses on the al-
ready of the already/not yet nature of
the kingdom, the inaugurated aspects
of eschatology. G.K. Beale and others
is thus a typology of which Matthew
is well aware, but which he uses with
considerable restraint. It is absorbed
into a much richer conception of Jesus
as Messiah.
6
France points out that
even W.D. Davies, who devoted much
study to the issue, was cautious in
drawing a conclusion about the mat-
ter.
7
Schreiner is likewise hesitant to
place too much emphasis on this,
the theme is present but not particu-
larly prominent.
8
All three (Davies,
France, and Schreiner) agree that,
Jesus is not just another Moses,
but something far higher.
9
There are
certainly similarities between Moses
and Jesus, but also signifcant differ-
ences. For the law was given through
Moses; grace and truth came through
Jesus Christ (John 1:17).
Rather than showing Christ to be
a new Moses in the sense of a new
lawgiver, the parallels between Moses
and Jesus are better seen as show-
ing Christ to be the greater prophet
who was to come after Moses. The
difference is subtle but an important
one. We have more solid ground to
stand on here. Deuteronomy 18:15-19
clearly states that the Lord will raise
up a prophet like Moses and that
Israel will be obligated to listen to
that prophet. It does not speak of that
prophet as a lawgiver. As John him-
self brings out in John 6:14, the people
who were fed from the seven barley
loaves and two fsh (and later that day
heard the discourse on the bread of
life), recognized Jesus not as another
Moses or another lawgiver but as the
Prophet who is to come.
What is meant when Deuteronomy
Teacher, 188.
6 France, Matthew: Evangelist and
Teacher, 187.
Teacher, 186-188.
8 Schreiner, New Testament Theology,
173.
Teacher, 187.
18 says that the Prophet to come
would be like Moses? I take it to
mean that he would be a great proph-
et as was Moses. It should be obvious,
that if the prophet to come was going
to be exactly like Moses, then there
would be no point in the Lord sending
him. This suggests that there would
be some signifcant differences be-
tween Moses and the prophet to come.
Deuteronomy 18 makes it clear that
the authority of the prophet to come
would be greater than that of Moses.
No Christian scholar who wants to
maintain his credibility is going to
contest that Christ was different from
Moses in various ways and, in fact,
greater than Moses in several ways.
One problem with placing too
much emphasis on Jesus being a new
Moses is that Moses will forever be
associated with a written (and there-
fore external) law code and the as-
sociated old covenant that lacked the
power that later came with Christ and
the indwelling Holy Spirit. Paul takes
great pains to emphasize this point in
Romans 7-8. The NT writings scream
out on every page that Jesus changed
everything. We can think of Jesus as
a new Moses but it must include the
thought that Christ brings a signifcant
advance in Gods plan of redemption.
Salvation history took a sharp turn
with the coming of Moses; another
sharp turn occurred with the coming
of Christ.
We see in the NT an emphasis on
the continuity between the Old Cove-
nant era and the New Covenant era in
order to show that Christ fulflls OT
promises, prophecies and types. But
there is also a greater emphasis on the
discontinuity between the two eras.
The writer to the Hebrews reminds us
that everything was better under the
New Covenant. The coming of Christ
was a space-time singularity. To use
an expression of Beale, it was an ir-
reversible radical break with a former
period.
10
Jesus changed everything.
10 G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical
Both were kept out of reach of
the wicked ruler seeking their
death until the ruler himself was
reported to be dead.
Both were called by God out of
Egypt.
Both fasted for 40 days and 40
nights in the wilderness.
Both delivered moral and spiri-
tual guidelines from a mountain.
Other parallels between Moses and
Jesus have been noted. Jesus feeding
of the 5,000 in John 6 is frequently
cited as being a parallel to Moses pro-
viding manna for Israel in Sinai.
3

The quote above from Bar-
tholomew and ODowd was chosen
deliberately because it specifcally
speaks of Jesus as a new Moses and a
new lawgiver. Frequently, when Jesus
is spoken of both as a new Moses and
a new lawgiver, a distinction is not
made between the two. The discussion
goes forward with the assumption
that there is an equivalence between
new Moses and new lawgiver. That
needs some further consideration.
Some scholars are cautious about
Jesus being a new Moses. When
France reviews the evidence for
Matthew presenting Jesus as the new
Moses, he points out that the com-
parisons between Moses and Jesus are
implicit rather than explicit. Speak-
ing of the comparisons in Matthews
Gospel, he writes, the more obvious
typological motif is of Jesus as the
new Israel who undergoes the Exo-
dus experience, rather than the new
Moses who leads it.
4
He speaks of
Jesus as the new Moses as a sort of
sub-plot.
5
Jesus as the new Moses
3 Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical
Reliability of Johns Gospel (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001),
119.
4 R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and
Teacher (Grand Rapids, MI: Zonder-
van, 1989), 186-187.
VaningerContinued from page 1
Jesus was a new Moses in the
sense that he was the prophet who
was to come after Moses. But Jesus
was not a new Moses in the sense
of being a new lawgiver. The law
era was over. It was an age of im-
maturity. It was preliminary and
preparatory. It pointed to an era of
fulfllment. The OT is full of prom-
ises, prophecies and types. All three
require fulfllment. All three point to
change. Jesus changed everything. In
1 Corinthians 1:20, while speaking of
Christ, Paul dramatically asserts that,
all the promises of God fnd their
Yes in him. Jesus told his disciples,
everything written about me in the
Law of Moses and the Prophets and
the Psalms must be fulflled (Luke
24:44). The total Christ-centeredness
of the NT drives home the point: Jesus
changed everything.
But what about Galatians 6:2
where Paul uses the expression, the
law of Christ or 1 Corinthians 9:21,
under the law of Christ? In his
discussion of Gal. 6:2, Longenecker
suggests the possibility that Paul used
the expression polemically in an ad
hominem fashion either to outclass his
opponents in their use of or to
mock his Galatian converts obsession
with Mosaic legislation.
11
He goes on
to express the view that Paul uses the
law of Christ to mean the principles
behind the teachings and example of
Christ rather than ethical prescrip-
tions to be carried out in rabbinic
fashion.
12
This interpretation also
Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,
2011), 114.
11 Richard N. Longenecker, WBC,
Galatians (Dallas, TX: Word Books,
1990), 275.
12 Longenecker, WBC, Galatians, 276.
Immediately before this statement,
Longenecker writes Paul is not set-
ting forth Jesus as a new Moses. I
take him to mean that Paul is not set-
ting forth Jesus as a new lawgiver in
the same sense that Moses was a law-
giver. Making a distinction between
Jesus being a new Moses and Jesus
works very well with the expression
under the law of Christ in 1 Corin-
thians 9:21.
These two references certainly
make it legitimate to speak of the law
of Christ but some clarifcation (such
as that given by Longenecker) would
certainly be appropriate if we feel that
Scripture gives evidence that Paul
used the expression to mean some-
thing quite different than the Law of
Moses. The internalization of the law
spoken of in Jeremiah 31 certainly
suggests a concept different than the
written law given at Sinai. Reisinger
in a recent series of articles speaks of
Christ as a new lawgiver but is care-
ful to add that the teachings of Christ
have given us new and higher house
rules and higher and more spiritual
laws than that of Mosaic law.
13
Again, we must read Deuteronomy
18 carefully. It says that when the
new prophet comes, it is to him you
shall listen. It doesnt say he will be
a lawgiver. If we speak of Jesus as a
lawgiver without some clarifcation,
we run the risk of dragging the old
into the new. The new wine has burst
the old wineskins which need to be
discarded.
We can recognize Jesus as a new
Moses but must realize that his teach-
ings were very different from the Law
of Moses. Thus:
Matthew also portrays Jesus as a
new Moses. But as Davi[e]s rightly
notes, he is far more than thatit is
intriguing to note that his new law
differs signifcantly from Mosaic law
in its form and focus. A new act in
the drama of Scripture - indeed, the
central act - has now dawned, and
while Jesus affrms and fulflls the law
of Moses, he teaches with the new
situation in mind. Intriguingly his new
style of law has many resemblances
being a lawgiver will help greatly to
clarify the issues in question.
13 John G. Reisinger, Christ, Our New
Covenant Prophet: Part 2, Sound of
Grace 190, September 2012, 4.
to wisdom.
14
While Jesus has not formulated a
new law code, he has given us a rule
of life. It is greatly superior to the Law
of Moses. A. Blake White has shown
that it involves the teaching and ex-
ample of Christ and his apostles, the
law (principle) of love, and the entire
canon seen in the light of Christ.
15
We
should probably not call this rule of
life a law or law code without fur-
ther clarifcation lest we unnecessarily
confuse the old with the new. The NT
never speaks of Jesus as a lawgiver or
as his teachings as a law code.
We should adhere to the more bib-
lical concept that Christ is the prophet
who follows Moses as the fnal and
ultimate spokesman for God, being
himself the living Word of God. His
role as the ultimate prophet
16
certainly
includes giving mankind a new and
better rule of life not based upon
prohibitions and case laws but upon
wisdom and empowered and guided
by the indwelling Holy Spirit.
We should also remember that
Moses was not just a lawgiver.
Although modern Christians
tend to think of Moses primarily as a
lawgiver, to the ancient Jews he was
far more. Moses was primarily re-
membered as a redeemer, a deliverer,
and a savior. Presentation of Jesus as
the new Moses thus emphasized His
redemptive role.
17
14 Bartholomew; ODowd, Old Testa-
ment Wisdom Literature: A Theologi-
cal Introduction, 241.
15 A. Blake White, The Law of Christ: A
Theological Proposal (Frederick, MD:
New Covenant Media, 2010).
16 Reisinger speaks of Christ as the
true and fnal prophet and the new
covenant prophet. John G. Reisinger,
Christ, Our New Covenant Prophet,
Priest and King: Introduction, Sound
of Grace 189, July-August 2012, 16.
17 Charles Quarles, NACSBT, Sermon
on the Mount (Nashville, TN: B & H,
2011), 23.
VaningerContinued from page 13 one of the primary activities of the
Holy Spirit is to impart godly wisdom
to believers. In this very same pas-
sage, Paul associates the teaching of
the Spirit with having the mind of
Christ (2:16). Gods wisdom turns
out to be the mind of Christ, con-
veyed and revealed through the Holy
Spirit.
21
This link between godly wisdom
and the Holy Spirit is confrmed and
strengthened in Ephesians 5. There
we read three exhortations: Look
carefully then how you walk, not as
unwise but as wisedo not be fool-
ish, but understand what the will of
the Lord isdo not get drunk with
winebut be flled with the Spirit
(Eph. 5:15-18). Thus wisdom, under-
standing the will of the Lord, and
being flled with the Holy Spirit are
synonymous or at least very closely
related.
This link between wisdom and the
Holy Spirit brings to mind Pauls con-
trast between the letter (Mosaic law)
and the Spirit in 2 Corinthians 3:6-9.
The Spirit of God imparts wisdom
to the believer that is superior to the
instruction of the law. The purpose
of the law was to kill in the sense of
condemning the sinner. In contrast,
the purpose of the wisdom imparted
by the Spirit of God is to redeem from
sin in the sense of transforming the
life of the believer to one of glory and
21 Anthony C. Thiselton, The Living
Paul (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2009), 56.
Quarles approach to Jesus as a
new or better Moses is very refresh-
ing and helpful, the emphasis being
on Jesus role as savior rather than as
lawgiver. Moses was perhaps the most
profound type of Christ as a redeemer
in the entire OT. Moses was the
earthly savior of Israel. He provided
redemption from slavery in the iron
furnace of Egypt. He put Israel on the
path to the Promised Land.
When Matthew portrayed Jesus
as the next Moses or the new Moses,
he offered a graphic description of
Jesus role as Redeemer, Deliverer,
and SaviorMatthew appealed to
OT texts about bondage and redemp-
tion, slavery and deliverance to show
that Jesus would be a deliverer who
rescues Gods people from the worst
plight of all, sin and its serious conse-
quencesThe theological point made
by comparing Jesus to Moses was
quite profound - Jesus is the Savior of
Gods people.
18
Jesus Sermon on the Mount is fre-
quently compared to Moses receiving
the Ten Commandments on Mount
Sinai. Some teach that Christ present-
ed a new law to replace the Law of
Moses while others teach that Christ
was clarifying or correcting misun-
derstandings of the Law of Moses.
What Jesus delivers is not a new
law, but the true understanding of what
had been revealed to Moses on Sinai
and only partly understood: he does
not destroy the old but fulflls it (5.17-
20), as he alone is able to do.
19

Hooker is both right and wrong.
She is correct to say that, What
Jesus delivers is not a new law but
wrong when she says, but the true
understanding of what had been
revealed to Moses on Sinai and only
18 Quarles, NACSBT, Sermon on the
Mount, 24, 25-26, 37.
19 Morna D. Hooker, Where is Wisdom
to be Found (1), in David F. Ford,
Graham Stanton, eds., Reading Texts,
Seeking Wisdom (London: SCM Press,
2003), 122.
partly understood. We do not have to
choose between a new law and the
Law of Moses clarifed by Jesus. The
teachings of Christ are in a different
category.
Despite the Moses and Sinai
typology in the introduction to the
SM [Sermon on the Mount], one must
not conclude that the SM constitutes
a new law comparable to the Mosaic
law...The SM is categorically differ-
ent from the Mosaic law. Its precepts
are the law written on the heart in
fulfllment of the promise of the new
covenant (Jer. 31:33).
20
The NT teaches that law gives way
to a wisdom taught by Christ and the
apostles and imparted by the Holy
Spirit of God. This wisdom produces
a higher ethic and standard of conduct
than any law code could produce.
In an extended passage in 1 Corin-
thians 2, Paul contrasts the wisdom
of men (2:5) with the wisdom of
God (2:7). This passage uses some
very meaningful expressions that
help us get a handle on an important
relationship between the attainment
of godly wisdom and the activity of
the Holy Spirit in the believer. Table
1 shows some interesting and instruc-
tive contrasts.
In this passage, the wisdom of men
(conveyed using various expressions)
is contrasted with the wisdom and
power of God and the working of the
Holy Spirit. This data suggests that
20 Quarles, NACSBT, Sermon on the
Mount, 38.
Table 1
The wisdom of man The wisdom of God
plausible words of wisdom (2:4) demonstration of the Spirit (2:4)
the wisdom of men (2:5) the power of God (2:5)
a wisdom of this age (2:6)
a secret and hidden wisdom of God
(2:7)
the spirit of the world (2:12) the Spirit who is from God (2:12)
human wisdom (2:13) being taught by the Spirit (2:13)
righteousness. We fnd this very con-
cept of sanctifcation conveyed just
after Pauls discussion of the letter
vs. the Spirit:
We all, with unveiled face, behold-
ing the glory of the Lord, are being
transformed into the same image from
one degree of glory to another. For
this comes from the Lord who is the
Spirit (2 Cor. 3:18).
Thus the progression from Law
to Wisdom that we see in the OT is
given greater defnition in the NT. The
law condemns the sinner exposing
man as a fallen creature but the Spirit
reverses the effects of the fall and im-
parts to the believer the true wisdom
of Christ producing a righteous and
holy life. Thus we see that the wis-
dom exhibited and communicated by
Christ and imparted by the Holy Spirit
surpasses the law in providing a rule
of life for the believer that will serve
us well in this life and for eternity.
Moral issues are frequently very
complex and a solution requires
more than a list of commands or case
laws. Thus, wisdom often does not
set forth specifc rules of behavior,
but rather recognizes that there may
be various responses occasioned by
different circumstances.
22
In some
ways Pauls ethic is rather general,
for he does not give specifc guidance
for each situation. He realizes that in
many situations wisdom is needed
to determine the prudent and godly
course of action.
23
In the eternal
resurrected state, we will not live by a
law code but by the wisdom of Christ
and the guidance of the indwelling
Holy Spirit.
On the other hand, it is important
to recognize that living by the Spirit
does not eliminate the need in our
still fallen state for specifc guidance
regarding ethical issues. Jesus and the
22 Perdue, Wisdom Literature: A Theo-
logical History, 34.
23 Thomas R. Schreiner, New Testament
Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,
2008), 656.
NT writers did not hesitate to reaffrm
the moral principles found in the OT
and to express additional moral guide-
lines. Paul, the very one who spoke of
living by the Spirit, flled his letters
with specifc ethical exhortations and
directives.
24
Yet Paul would be the last
one to think of himself as formulating
a new law code. Rather Paul saw his
own ethical teachings as having the
mind of Christ and being conformed
to the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29; 1
Cor. 15:49; 2 Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10).
The teachings of Jesus are foun-
dational; they take us down to the
bedrock of reality.
25
They profoundly
transcend the national law code of OT
Israel and take us to the very heart of
the Almighty Creator God. Everyone
then who hears these words of mine
and does them will be like a wise
man who built his house on the rock

(Matt. 7:24).
The teachings of Jesus build on the
principles of OT wisdom in that, The
primary demand of Jesus is for righ-
teous character
26
rather than mere
outward conformity to a law code.
The ethics of the Kingdom place a
new emphasis upon the righteousness
of the heart...The primary emphasis
is upon the inner character which
underlies outward conduct. The law
condemned murder; Jesus condemned
anger as sin...anger belongs not to the
sphere of outward conduct but to that
of inner attitude and character.
27
24 Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul, Apostle
of Gods Glory in Christ (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001),
307-329. For a very brief summary,
see Thomas R. Schreiner, 40 Ques-
tions About Christians and Biblical
Law (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel,
2010), 105-107.
25 H. N. Ridderbos, BSC, Matthew
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1987),
155.
26 George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of
the Future (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerd-
mans, 1974), 293.
27 Ladd, The Presence of the Future,
292.
The teachings of Jesus not only
provide wisdom designed for life in
the last days
28
in which we currently
live but also anticipate the resurrec-
tion ethics of the eternal state. Jesus
taught absolute ethics which were
valid both for the age to come and for
this age.
29
The Sermon on the Mount
gives us guiding principles now and
also a foretaste of what life in the New
Jerusalem will be like when we will
be fully conformed to the image of
Christ.
Gordon Fee has written much on
the subject of Christ and the wisdom
of God especially regarding 1 Corin-
thians 1:24, 30 and related passages.
30

Most of this material focuses on two
points. His arguments that Paul is not
speaking of Christ as being Wisdom
personifed (as in Proverbs 8, Sirach,
and Baruch) are very convincing. But
he goes even further and asserts that
Paul does not actually call Christ the
wisdom of God.
31
Rather, his position
is that Paul is saying that the wisdom
of God is the proclamation of Christ
crucifed.
32
That is certainly a true
statement but Ebert for one feels that
Fee has overstated his case somewhat
and that one can still leave place for
Paul to think of Christ explicitly in
terms of divine wisdom.
33
28 John Goldingay, Theological Diversity
and the Authority of the Old Testament
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987),
228.
29 Ladd, The Presence of the Future,
295.
30 Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Christology
(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publish-
ers, 2007), 102-107, 317-325, 595-
630.
31 Paul does not say in isolation that
Christ is the wisdom of God. Fee,
Pauline Christology, 102. See a simi-
lar statement on 104.
32 Gods wisdom lies precisely in the
folly of a crucifed Messiah. Fee,
Pauline Christology, 104.
33 Daniel J. Ebert IV, Wisdom Christol-
ogy (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and
The controversy over this matter
is largely irrelevant to the thesis of
this article. All we are asserting here
is that the teachings and example of
Christ display true biblical wisdom
more perfectly than any previous
revelation. The wisdom of God is
embodied in Christ.
34
Fee does not
appear to be opposed to that. But on
the other hand, Christ cannot be sim-
plistically equated with the wisdom of
God. Wisdom is one of Gods attri-
butes while Christ is a person of the
Godhead and thus much more than
the wisdom of God.
35

New Covenant Theology
It is relevant to ask at the conclu-
sion of our study: How does all this
relate to issues encountered in our
study of New Covenant Theology?
1. The understanding of the transi-
tory nature of the Law of Moses is
confrmed and strengthened. The
progression from law to wisdom
to the teachings of Christ is just
that, a progression from good to
better to best.
2. This progression of law wis-
dom Christ helps to clarify
how the law can be holy and
righteous and good and yet at the
same time be terminated with the
coming of Christ.
3. This progression of law wis-
dom Christ also helps to clarify
how the internalization of the
law is accomplished in the new
covenant era. In contrast to the
external laws of the old covenant,
which had no power over sin in
ones life, the internalized law
corresponds to the spiritual trans-
formation of the believer into the
image of Christ through the power
Reformed Publishing Company,
2011), 63n2.
34 Leon Morris, TNTC, 1 Corinthians
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1958), 50.
35 Ebert, Wisdom Christology, 176.
of the Holy Spirit imparting godly
wisdom. The new law of the
new covenant is of a totally differ-
ent character than OT law being
written not with ink but with the
Spirit of the living God, not on
tablets of stone but on tablets of
human hearts (2 Cor. 3:3).
4. More generally, the progression of
law wisdom Christ reveals
how OT wisdom can be integrated
into biblical theology. The New
Testament not only fulflls Old
Testament prophecy; it fulflls
the whole Old Testament, includ-
ing the law, history, psalms, and
wisdom literature.
36
Our focus
has been on how law and wisdom
relate to Christ from the perspec-
tive of biblical theology. Balchins
statement regarding wisdom is
certainly true of both law and
wisdom, Christ has both fulflled
it and gone beyond it.
37
5. The understanding of OT typolo-
gy is confrmed and clarifed. The
nation of Israel in the OT era was
a type of the entire world popula-
tion just as the land of Israel was a
type of the entire globe. As we see
Gods plan of redemption unfold
in time, we see a progression from
a national covenant to a universal
covenant applicable to all man-
kind. The rule of life for Gods
people accordingly progresses
from national laws to universal
moral and spiritual principles that
transcend all national, ethnic, and
cultural boundaries, and ultimate-
ly to words from Immanuel, God
with us. Closely related to this is
a corresponding progression from
a more external religion to a form
36 David L. Baker, Two Testaments, One
Bible Third Edition (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity Press, 2010), 200.
37 John F. Balchin, Paul, Wisdom and
Christ, in Harold H. Rowdon, ed.,
Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology
presented to Donald Guthrie, (Down-
ers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
1982), 212.
of worship in spirit and truth
(John 4:24). This comports well
with the emphasis in the NT on
the newness and superiority of
New Covenant faith in Christ.
6. The progression of law wisdom
Christ adds another facet to the
emphasis in the NT regarding the
total exaltation of Christ over all
else.
VaningerContinued from page 15
November 21, 2013
Dear Friends,
Please send me six copies of
Sound of Grace for November
2013.
Thank you all for your
very helpful ministry.
I am now a resident of a
senior living apartment and
I can share with different
folks at each meal and at two
Bible studies!
In Christ,
Jacqueline S.
December 30, 2013
Dear Friends,
This donation is in appre-
ciation of Brother Reisingers
ministry.
He is the reason my hus-
band Stuart and I came to
Oregonwe are very indebed
to him. Of course, it was the
Lords plan; He receives our
praise.
Keeping you in our
prayers.
Adeline K.
are helpfully reminding us that the
whole New Testament is eschatologi-
cal, but in large measure it is escha-
tologically backward-looking more
than forward-looking. That is to say,
the eschatology of the New Testament
is focused more on what the Messiah
has already done than on what He was
yet to do. NCT in no way downplays
the yet-unfulflled aspects of proph-
ecy (e.g. resurrection, new earth), but
wants to place the accent where the
New Testament does. The frst coming
of Jesus is very signifcant for the ful-
fllment of Old Testament prophecy.
Having prefaced my answer with
that, three of the four millennial views
are compatible with NCT. One can be
NCT and be historic premillennial,
amillennial, or postmillennial with
theological consistency (though many
will be quick to assert that their view
is the only consistent one!). Obvi-
ously Dispensational Premillennial-
ism doesnt have a seat at the NCT
table since they have their own. One
can have the exact same hermeneutic
and biblical-theological outlook, but
merely read Revelation 20 in different
ways. In my experience, it seems that
historic premillennialism and amillen-
nialism are the most common millen-
nial views of NCT.
9. Some people (such as Dr. R.C.
Sproul) use the terms Covenant
Theology and Reformed The-
ology synonymously. Can New
Covenant Theology maintain a
Reformed identity?
Hmmm. I am not sure that NCT
has ever been concerned with main-
taining a Reformed identity. Perhaps
an always Reforming identity since
we think the Protestant Reformers
did not apply sola Scriptura robustly
enough. I am sure I do not speak for
all NCT advocates, but I agree with
Sproul and many others (Horton,
Clark, Hart, etc) who say that Re-
formed Theology is Covenant Theol-
ogy (though many do not use the label
in this way; see DeYoungs recent blog
(11/7/13) on the matter). Many early
American NCT guys were unwelcome
in the Reformed Baptist world.
Many of them used Sovereign Grace
Baptist to distinguish themselves
from Reformed Baptists. I think
Reformed folks are those who adhere
to the Reformed Confessions and Re-
formed Baptists are those who adhere
to the 1689 London Baptist Confes-
sion, which is built from the West-
minster Confession. Furthermore,
since NCT does not bear directly on
soteriology, I think an ardent Armin-
ian could adhere to NCT, though Ive
never met one personally.
10. Speaking to someone who
does not believe New Covenant The-
ology, what would you give as the
top three reasons to adopt it?
At the risk of appearing arrogant,
frst I would say it is the only theology
that can be derived from a plain read-
ing of Scripture. One would be hard
pressed to fnd a CT guy who came to
his theological conclusions apart from
reading books on Reformed Theology
or Reformed confessions. Similarly,
you will not fnd a Dispensationalist
who came to DT without reading Sco-
feld, Ryrie, MacArthur, or some other
Bible helps from a DT perspective.
Second, one simply will not fnd
theological categories such as cov-
enant of grace, covenant of works,
a Sabbath change from Saturday to
Sunday, a pretribulation rapture, or
many other DT and CT theological
tenets from Scripture. In other words,
NCT strives to use the language of
Scripture in its theological formula-
tion. We believe that theology ought
to be grounded in the exegesis of the
biblical text and in our opinion, NCT
does this most consistently.
Third, I would say that NCT is
the system of theology that is most
consistently Christ-centered. All
Evangelical theology strives to be
Christ-centered, but in our opinion
not all are consistent. As John Reis-
inger pointed out in Abrahams Four
Seeds (see pages 5, 36, 47, 53, 58, 94,
99, 100, 118), CT and DT ironically
share the same hermeneutic on two
different points: DT on the Abrahamic
covenant and physical land; CT on
the Abrahamic covenant and physical
children. Neither consistently views
these two issues with the Christotelic
lenses Jesus Himself encouraged us
to wear (Luke 24). DT fails to see
that Christ wins the new creationnot
merely a strip of land in the Middle
Eastfor his people. The land is a type
of the new earth. CT fails to see that
the promise was to the mediatorial
head and his seed, not the individual
believer and their seed. Christ is the
mediatorial head of the new covenant
so the promise is for His seed, which
is spiritual, not physical. Jesus has
no grandchildren. The same could
be said of the way Christ transforms
the Sabbath and sums up Israel. NCT
strives to practice a robustly Christ-
centered hermeneutic in all biblical
interpretation.
The Lord said to my Lord:
Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.
Therefore let all Israel be assured
of this: God has made this Jesus,
whom you crucifed, both Lord and
Christ (Acts 2:30-36 NIV).
It is interesting that Peter said that
God made Jesus both Lord and Christ.
We would expect him to say, Lord
and Savior. We will take up with that
in our next article.
Everyone wants the kingdom of
God, but few want it first.
Charles L. Venable
WestContinued from page 3
psalmist it is suffcient to be exalting
in who God is and what he has done
for his peopleand when the bless-
ings of God to his people are con-
sidered, it is natural for the pastoral
imagery to come to mind.
As rich as the comforting entail-
ments of the metaphor are, they are
not the only emotions the image is
designed to generate. Obviously the
imagery in Psalm 100, though not
antithetical to comfort by any means,
is simply focused in a different direc-
tion. The image is being employed to
heighten and to further rejoicing. This
is not a psalm one typically thinks
of when there is a need for funereal
comfort; here the metaphor drives
us into higher spheres of celebration.
This means that the shepherd image
is so elastic it functions equally well
in the valley of the shadow of death
(the superlatively darkest valley or
trial) and at a party: it is benefcially
employed in times of tears and times
of holy merriment. The fexibility and
fttingness of the imagery to such a
diverse range of situations and moods
speaks volumes about its impact and
resonance.
As we have seen, the shepherding
imagery effectively produces a variety
of emotional responses depending on
the existential situation. The emo-
tional responses, of course, cannot
be detached from the propositional
content the metaphor is designed to
communicate. It is one thing to say,
The Lord cares for you, and another
to say, The Lord is your shepherd,
even if you are driving at the same
point. The metaphorical image, while
ultimately hinging on the proposition-
al claim, carries more emotive punch.
We inescapably think in pictures and
they affect us very deeply. The picture
of God as our shepherd and us as his
sheep is capable of properly evoking
an astonishingly wide range of ftting
emotions.
The shepherd metaphor is, how-
ever, much more than a means for
producing human joy and/or comfort:
not minimizing the emotional and
existential impact, it is also used to
teach us many different things about
God. This can be seen by noting some
of the different contexts in which the
imagery is used. The Lord is referred
to as a shepherd and we are referred
to as his sheep in contexts where the
point lies in a different neighborhood
than us fnding this comforting, reas-
suring, or a source of rejoicing. Some
contexts where the Lord is referred to
as a shepherd are full of judgment; in
these places the metaphor serves as
a warning. Now of course there is an
ultimate sense in which all of Gods
attributes, acts, and roles are for the
good of his children. But in the same
way that the sovereignty of God over
the whole world is ultimately a com-
fort for his children, any fair reading
of the Bible will show that the sover-
eignty of God in immediate contexts
can be a great warning to his sinning
children, to say nothing of being
ultimately disastrous to his enemies.
We must not gloss the discipline and
correction motifs that are embedded
in the metaphor: the Lord is our shep-
herd, and this is a sobering reminder
that he carries a rod of correction.
It should be clear upon refec-
tion that aspects of the metaphor
from which we derive comfort, joy,
warning, etc. are actually dependent
on other facets of the image. For
example, it is wonderful to consider
the tender mercy, compassion, and
concern the Lord has for his fock. But
what does his sympathy amount to if
he is incapable of defending us? Hav-
ing a concerned but helpless shepherd
is not very comforting at all. Like-
wise, God could be a very powerful
shepherd, but if he didnt care what
became of us then his power would
not be a reason for us to fnd comfort.
The distinct elements of compassion
and power only function when they
are combined.
These two elements come together
beautifully in the Book of Isaiah. One
of the things God wants his people
to know when he begins to comfort
them (cf. Isaiah 40:1) is that his care
and power and joined together. Isaiah
expresses it this way: See, the Sover-
eign Lord comes with power, and he
rules with a mighty arm. See, his re-
ward is with him, and his recompense
Annual John Bunyan Conference
May 5 7, 2014
Reformed Baptist Church, Lewisburg, PA
Speakers:
Peter Gentry, Larry McCall, Stephen Wellum, Steve West, and A. Blake White
Schedule and registration to follow.
Mark your calendarNOW
accompanies him. He tends his fock
like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs
in his arms and carries them close to
his heart; he gently leads those that
have young (Isaiah 40:10-11). Notice
the connection: the Sovereign Lord
comes with power and rules with a
mighty arm, yet he uses his strength to
tend his fock, gather his lambs, carry
them close to his heart, and he gently
leads the vulnerable.
The only reason these verses are
comforting and encouraging is that
they are both true. God coming with
power and ruling with a mighty arm
is a sheer disaster for the wicked. God
nurturing, loving, and tenderly caring
for his fock cannot be comforting un-
less he also rules in sovereign power
and might. If he has power but no ten-
der love, he rules as a tyrant; if he has
compassion but not power, his shep-
herding will be ineffective. And this
is to say nothing of the richness of the
picture that results when you recog-
nize that God is carrying you close to
his heart, and to do so he scoops you
up in the same mighty arms by which
he sovereignly rules the universe. A
helpless sheep pulled to the heart of
I would like to help support the ministry of Sound of Grace:
A tax-deductible gift in the amount of ______________ is enclosed.
I would like to receive Sound of Grace via the USPS:
A check in the amount of $20.00 for a paper copy (payable to Sound of Grace) is enclosed.
I would like to receive Sound of Grace via email:
A check in the amount of $10.00 for a pdf fle (payable to Sound of Grace) is enclosed.
Please continue free of charge: Via email via USPS
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLYTHANK YOU
Name:
Street Address:
City: State/Providence: Zip/Postal:
Email address: @ Phone number:
Mail to: Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive, Frederick, MD 21703-6938
infnite love by the omnipotent arms
of the sovereign shepherdhere the
point of our metaphor becomes un-
fathomable and indescribable. Thanks
be to God.
Not surprisingly, it is at the inter-
section of Gods power and love that
we fnd the related theme of wisdom.
This element is not made as explicit
when the imagery is used of Godit
is assumed that this shepherd has
more wisdom than his sheep! When
God leads and guides us as a shep-
herd leads and guides his fock, the
grounding for the image is that God
knows whats best for us, he knows
where we should be, he cares enough
to take us there, and he is powerful
enough to ensure that we arrive at his
chosen destination. He also knows
when we are straying from where we
should be, and he gathers the scat-
tered. (More will be said about this in
the next article.)
One of the very interesting things
about the shepherd imagery is that
God ultimately fulflls the realities
communicated in the metaphor to a
perfect degree, but he also entrusts
some people with a shepherding role.
Some are given military responsibility
over their fock (e.g. the army), others
are given political responsibility (e.g.
their sheep are cities or nations), and
still others are given responsibility
in the religious sphere (e.g. they are
to function as prophets, priests, or
teachers). God as the true shepherd
employs undershepherds, and they are
fully accountable to him for how they
discharge their duties to his fock. In
fact, it is desperately important for
them to remember that their fock
is really never their fock at all: it is
Gods fock over which they have been
given certain stewardship responsi-
bilities. In next months article we will
examine some of the OT material that
applies the shepherding imagery not
to God but to human beings. We will
see, even then, that whether the con-
text involves human shepherds who
are good or bad, the Chief Shepherd
is not too distant in the background.
And given his sovereign might and
infnite love for his sheep, human be-
ings who are entrusted with shepherd-
ing responsibilities need to take them
very, very seriously.
SOVEREIGN GRACE NEW COVENANT MI NISTRIES
5317 WYE CREEK DRIVE
FREDERICK, MARYLAND 21703- 6938
FORWARDING SERVICE REQUESTED
Check your label for expiration.
This is Issue 204 Please renew your
subscription promptly.
NON-PROFI T
ORGANI ZATION
U. S. POSTAGE PAI D
PERMI T NO. 45
FREDERICK, MD 21701
A New Years Resolution
Matthew Henry
My times are in Your hand! Psalm 31:15
Firmly believing that my times are in Gods hand, I here submit myself and all my affairs for the ensuing year, to
the wise and gracious disposal of Gods divine providence. Whether God appoints for me health or sickness, peace
or trouble, comforts or crosses, life or deathmay His holy will be done!
All my time, strength, and service, I devote to the honor of the Lord Jesusand even my common actions. It is
my earnest expectation, hope, and desire, my constant aim and endeavorthat Jesus Christ may be magnifed in
me.
In everything I have to domy entire dependence is upon Jesus Christ for strength. And whatever I do in word
or deed, I desire to do all in His name, to make Him my Alpha and Omega. I have all from Himand I would use
all for Him.
If this should prove a year of affiction, a sorrowful year to meI will fetch all my supports and comforts from
the Lord Jesus and stay myself upon Him, His everlasting consolations, and the good hope I have in Him through
grace.
And if it should be my dying yearthen my times are in the hand of the Lord Jesus. And with a humble reliance
upon His mediation, I would venture into the eternal world looking for the blessed hope. Dying as well as living
Jesus Christ will, I trust, be gain and advantage to me.
Oh, that the grace of God may be suffcient for me, to keep me always a humble sense of my own unworthiness,
weakness, folly, and infrmitytogether with a humble dependence upon the Lord Jesus Christ for both righteous-
ness and strength.
Courtesy of Grace Gems: www.GraceGems.org

Sound of Grace, Issue 204, February 2014

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sound of Grace, Issue 204, February 2014

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

thew portrays Jesus as a new Moses.

Potrebbero piacerti anche