Covenant Theology FAQ - Part 1

6 But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.

8 For he finds fault with them when he says:

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,

when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah,

9  not like the covenant that I made with their fathers

on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.

For they did not continue in my covenant,

and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

10  For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israelafter those days, declares the Lord:I will put my laws into their minds,and write them on their hearts,and I will be their God,and they shall be my people.

11  And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor

and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’

for they shall all know me,

from the least of them to the greatest.

12  For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,

and I will remember their sins no more.”

13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.  (Hebrews 8:6–13, ESV)

QQ.  Why do you call the New Covenant the Johannine Covenant?

Answer.  Simply put the Bible, when correctly understood doesn’t support the nomenclature “(the New Covenant), & since the majority standard nomenclature within Christian theological/ecclesiastical/academic centers on proper names moreso than content. 

Some people think that the term “new covenant” in Jeremiah 31: 31 - 34 is a title —> but that’s not the intention of the text. 

“New” stands in contrast with “old,” but when we speak of God’s over arching covenants, our confessional language on the Earth speaks in terms of names, usually of people associated with thosenames, and these names are those of the transitional prophets:  Adam, Noah, Abraham, & Moses.   Because the majority of the Monarchial Covenant’s era centers on Israel’s monarchical history & because 

“Samuel” & “Shmuel” don’t exactly have the same “ring” as “Davidic.”

Because the Bible is clear, the term “new” is a descriptor not a proper name.  Thus, in keeping with the standard nomenclature, the proper name for the New Covenant is Johannine Covenant, or as to content, the Reformational Covenant.   

In addition, as to nomenclature, there is no such thing as a single, non-composite administration, called “the Old Covenant.” 

The term “Old Covenant,” if used as a name is shorthand for “Former covenantal era(s).

QQ.   What makes a covenant administration within the overarching Covenant of Grace “new” or “old?”

Answer.  

As to old, Hebrews emphasizes the promises” that God reveals, not the Law. 

The Law doesn’t change, & as we follow covenantal history, we see that the promises are characterized by “already/not yetness.”   In other words, in keeping with the nature of progressive revelation, the promises are explained in greater detail as is God’s moral law & the civil code that accompanies. 

What makes the promises of the Old Covenant era “better” is the fulfillment of those promises in Christ & the amount of didactic material that has been revealed.   

For example, perpetual/semi - perpetual animal sacrifices are no longer necessary because Christ has come.  The law of sacrifice for atonement has reached its apex in & through Christ, & now that redemption has been historically anchored by His once for all time life, death, burial,  & resurrection, animal sacrifices are generally obsolete, although, when you think about, since we still eat animals, a certain amount of animal sacrifice is still with us, insofar as we eat meat from time to time via sacramental meals like the fellowship meal. 

QQ.   Does the concept of a new covenant that makes or more covenants “obsolete” mean the older of the two covenants has been replaced?  

Answer. Yes & No, insofar as the covenants expand one upon the other.

Promises are fulfilled in part or in whole then expanded & explained.

This means that the Decalogue is still in effect, as is the civil code.   In addition, this means there certain promised made to Abraham & those whom he represents, thus, broadly speaking, Dispenationalism is correct in drawing a distinction between Israel & the Church, but wrong in separating them fairly radically. In truth, Israel & the Church are perichoretic, & just like the Father, Son, & Spirit together constitute a single infinite, eternal, & immutable being that is multiune & at the same time the 3 Members of the Trinity are unique & perichoretic, so to are Israel & the Church.

QQ.  If the civil code is still in effect, then doesn’t that mean we have to stone cultic homosexuals?  

Answer. Not unless their behavior rises to such a level, say if they were also band of roaming  Goat Fuckers vandalizing the environment, doing heavy duty sorcery,  & planning to commit or are in the process of committing treason.    Otherwise, in this day & age, a figurative stoning will do. 

QQ. What about the food laws?

Answer.   Acts 10 analogizes between food & people. The entire point of the vision is that the  Gentiles are now openly admitted to the covenant community on the basis of the vision, insofar as the food & the people directly correspond.   By drawing Peter’s attention to Gentiles now being “clean,” the vision also draws attention to the suspension of the food laws. 

The clean/unclean distinction in the OT  is given for 3 essential reasons, two of which are sacrifice & health.    Animal sacrifice is no longer required.  In the Common Era, we have moved on to more thorough cooking methods.   Thus, the 2nd reason behind the food laws is fulfilled via a functional equivalent. 

The 3rd reason is strategic & prophetic.  The food laws answer specific food related practices in the ancient world.   The binding rite in the hands of the Witch of Endor is sorcery.  In Ezekiel’s hands, it is prophecy that corresponds to her activities. The food laws operate the se way.     For the health & safety of the nation, God’s policy was one of abstention that emphasized health & holiness.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul does not prohibit eating food sacrificed to idols, thereby reforming the food laws.  Instead of answering sorcery & idolatry defensively via by abstention, the Christian tradition answers it offensively by engagement — which also corresponds to the reformation of the presentation of the Gospel which in the 1st century AD had become larded with works righteousness (cf. Romans 9:30 - 33).    

The Bible legalism & works righteousness.  Is man is made for the Sabbath, or is the Sabbath made for man?  According to Mark 2:23 - 28, the Sabbath is made for man.    This means that we are free to exercise discernment/wisdom & are allowed to alter & adapt our practices  with respect to concrete particulars as long as we abide by the abiding principles in the Law & Gospel.    The abiding principle is found in the first table of the Law, which concerns our relationship to God.   The concrete particular is found in the casuistic laws concerning food & the clean/unclean distinction.    

The food laws have been reformed.   If some decides to abide by the abstention policy then by all means they may do so — but not because God condemns & commends without regard to the motives of the heart, which at the heart of legalism & works righteousness.   Remember— some people think God condemns people’s dietary habits on the basis of the identity of their food. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Bible says He condemns & commends based on our motives not external factors like the origin of your meat (1 Samuel 16:7, Jeremiah 17:9 & 10, James 1:14 - 15, Matthew 5:27 - 28)

QQ.  What about the Sabbath Day? 

Answer.  General,immutable stipulation: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 

Specific Stipulation: 

9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.  (Exodus 20:8–11, ESV)

General principles/stipulations are not modifiable.  Specific stipulations here work like case law.   They are modifiable in keeping with the overall concept that concrete exemplars can be modified.  For example, the Book of Esther lays down the rationale for Purim & even describes its observance — > but it stops short of commanding its observance.   In line manner, the day or days of worship, rest, & reset is modifiable, particularly under persecution conditions,  but the overarching principle to rest, worship, & reset is not.