God's Word

How do we fulfill the righteous requirements of the law?

Rom. 8:3-4 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. How is the righteous requirement of the law fulfilled in believers? I believe it is a mistake to believe this passage is referring to the actual performance of believers in keeping God’s law. Since that takes perfection, it is impossible for believers to be successful law keepers and that is why Paul calls it a ministry of death. Seems to me this passage is referring to the fact that Jesus kept the law and it is fulfilled in those who walk according to the Spirit, which describes believers. A chapter earlier Paul said, Rom. 7:6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. 

Therefore, we are released from the law of sin and death and set free by the Spirit of life (Rom. 8:2).  The bottom line of this passage is that God sent his son to do what we cannot do and that is to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law for those who, through faith, serve in the new way of the Spirit. To think that this passage is teaching successful law keeping by believers is to miss the point that Jesus Christ successfully kept the law in order that those who are in him through faith might be covered in his righteousness, not ours.

Believers should rejoice in being free in Jesus Christ and following the lead of the Holy Spirit rather than submitting to the Old Covenant yoke of slavery through law keeping.    

We are only a mist

When I was a senior in college I met and became friends with a graduate student who came to Mississippi State to get his masters degree. After I graduated in May of that year, I lost contact with him.

A few years later in May of 1967 I entered Air Force pilot training at Vance AFB in Enid, Oklahoma. In the middle of that summer I received a phone call from someone I didn’t know who was a friend of my friend from my college days. She informed me that he had been killed in a commercial plane crash and that his wife, whom I had never met or even knew about, asked her to call and inform me. He would have been about twenty-seven years old and I later learned that he had gotten his PhD degree in engineering and had a very promising career ahead of him. He had been married for about a year and his wife was five months pregnant when he died. A few weeks after that shocking phone call, we had a fatal T-38 crash at Vance that killed a student and instructor pilot.

All of these people had plans and were looking forward to long lives in which to pursue their goals. While there is nothing wrong with making temporal worldly plans, the reality is there are no guarantees that any worldly plans can be realized due to the uncertainty of life itself. The Bible points this out…………

(James 4:13-14 ESV) Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”—yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes.

However, there is one kind of planning for the future that cannot be shipwrecked by death or worldly events. While we are alive in this world we can make solid irrevocable plans for where we spend eternity. These plans are secure no matter what happens in this world of trouble and the Holy Bible gives us instructions on how to make these plans. The bottom line is ………

(Romans 6:23 ESV) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

These are the only future plans that a person can count on. Have you made your plans for your future in eternity?

Growth in Sanctification

Where is the best place for Christians to look for knowledge and information on their sanctification? While many point to the TEN COMMANDMENTS as the best place to look, I would say that the New Testament is the best, and Biblical place for Christians to look for guidance and divine instruction on their sanctification and discipleship. The TEN COMMANDMENTS contain only four duties to God and six to our fellow man, while Colossians 3:1-17 alone contains 32 instructions on Christian duty and ethics. Most of these are not covered by the TEN COMMANDMENTS.

The nation of Israel was under Law as expressed in the Mosaic Covenant and their covenant contract, the TEN COMMANDMENTS. Christians since the resurrection are not under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14). There are ethical and moral principles that Christians under grace are to practice and they are described in a more detailed and comprehensive way in the New Testament. The TEN COMMANDMENTS were given to the Old Covenant nation of Israel and the righteousness of God that they contain are better and more fully described in the New Testament.

The list below contains exhortations for New Covenant Christians to practice that are more detailed than the TEN COMMANDMENTS. This list is from Colossians 3:1-17 only and the New Testament is full of such directives in the gospels as well as the Epistles.

* Seek spiritual things
* Set your mind on spiritual things
* You are a spiritual person in Christ
* Put to death earthly desires: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry
* Also put away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth.
* Do not lie to one another
* Believers have put off the old self and have put on the new self
* The new self is being renewed in knowledge after the Image of its creator
* There is only one category of Christian and that is in Christ
* As God’s holy and beloved chosen put on compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience
* Bear with one another and forgive one another as the Lord has forgiven you
* Above all of these put on love which binds together
* Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts
* Be thankful
* Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly
* Teach and admonish one another in wisdom
* Sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs
* Do everything in the name of Jesus Christ giving thanks to God through him

Jesus doesn’t evolve

Ephesians 5:11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

The worldly forces at work today have latched on to the word evolve. Many secular humanists have even suggested that the church needs to evolve on the issue of homosexual marriage. Evolve???? This evolve business is just a way to soften or gloss over changing a doctrine or a core belief.

However, the Bible does not evolve and clearly warns against those who are trying to be accepted and curry favor with the world…… James 4:4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Paul in Eph. 5:11 commands Christians to not only reject such involvement with the unfruitful works of darkness, but to also actively oppose them.

If anyone is tempted to reject the teaching of Jesus Christ on marriage (Matthew 19:4-6), they should beware they are evolving themselves into being at enmity with God. Here is the way Jesus put it….. Mark 8:38 For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” Listen to Jesus and not false prophets and teachers who have “evolved” and claim you should to.

It really is a time to take a stand while you still can.

Biblical Covenants

I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”  (Genesis 9:11 ESV)

God has interacted with man through covenants during human history from the time of Noah through the present day.  The first covenant that appears in Scripture was made with Noah and all living creatures.  The sign of this covenant is the rainbow. 

Redemptive history is revealed in the Bible through two major covenants and understanding these covenants is essential to understanding God’s plan of redemption.  The first major covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, was in force for nearly all of the Old Testament beginning with Moses at Mt. Sinai.  This covenant is also referred to in Scripture as the Old Covenant (2 Cor. 3:14), First Covenant (Heb. 8:7, 9:1), or Law (Ex. 34:28).  The Mosaic Covenant was a temporary covenant that was fulfilled by Jesus Christ (Mt. 5:17) and replaced with the permanent New Covenant (Gal. 3:23-25, Heb. 8:13, 2 Cor. 3:7-11).  Christians celebrate the New Covenant with the Lord’s Supper.  (1 Cor. 11:25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.)  While the Old Covenant was temporary, the New Covenant is permanent with a better mediator in Jesus Christ who can save sinners, which the blood sacrifices of the Old Covenant could never do. 

God is one of the parties in all Biblical covenants, and the other party varies depending upon the covenant.  In the Mosaic Covenant the other party was the nation of Israel that was physically delivered from Egypt and their offspring.  Not many of them were spiritually redeemed (Rom. 9:27).  The Old Covenant did not include any of the descendents of Abraham and Jacob that lived prior to the exodus, and it did not include anyone other than the Jews that were delivered from Egypt (Deut. 5:3 Not with our fathers did the Lord make this covenant, but with us, who are all of us here alive today.). The New Covenant includes only regenerated believers who are in-Christ through faith (Heb. 8:10-12). 

Therefore, the only covenant now in force is the New Covenant.  There are no temporary New Covenant members and there are no covenant members that enter the New Covenant based on being born a Jew or being born to Christian parents (Romans 9:1-18).  Faith in Christ is the only way a person can enter into the New Covenant.  Paul makes it clear that the covenant of promise made with Abraham was for the spiritual descendents of Abraham and not his physical descendents (Rom. 9:6-8, Rom. 2:28-29, Gal. 6:16).

While the Old Testament is very useful for much information concerning God and his plan of redemption, Christians should be careful to follow the exhortations found in the New Testament for their covenant practice.  God’s laws for the New Covenant (Law of Christ 1 Cor. 9:20-21) are found in the New Testament.  Many are the same as in the Old Covenant, many have expired, and many have been strengthened (Matt. 5-7).  The New Covenant blessings found in the New Testament are better (Heb. 7:22, 8:6-7).  So to look to the Old Covenant for our covenant instruction is to literally place a yoke of slavery upon our necks (Acts 15:10, Gal. 5:1).  Believers in the New Covenant era should reject looking to Moses and the Old Covenant yoke of slavery for their covenant responsibilities.   This is the message of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) and Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians.



I Can’t Reconcile Covenant Theology

Introduction:

At my church , I was and am under the teaching of pastors that adhere to the system of theology known as covenant theology.  I have tried for years to understand and reconcile covenant theology with Scripture and I just have not been able to do it.  The more I have tried, the more inconsistencies and statements I found that were in conflict with Scripture.  I finally came to a point where I had to try and find another way to understand what the Bible taught about redemptive history and the covenants.  Dispensationalism [the other major Biblical theological system] made even less sense than covenant theology.  So, for a while I was left more or less twisting in the wind for an understandable theology.

A few years ago, through a blogging friend from Rochester, NY, I discovered some writers who presented another view of redemptive history.  This view held that redemptive history unfolded through a series of historical covenants that contained promises and fulfillments as well as a focus on Jesus Christ rather than the nation of Israel.  This view accepts the Bible’s reporting of covenants exactly as stated by Scripture and is known as New Covenant Theology.  While it is in the process of being developed, it does have some historical roots from the early reformation.  My views as expressed in this article borrows greatly from new covenant theology, but is not meant to necessarily be in lock step with the views of the leaders of this theology.  Although I have learned much from these new covenant theologians, my views are based on my understanding of Biblical revelation.  I am also indebted to numerous covenant theologians and pastors in my denomination as well as others. They have been and continue to be a tremendous blessing to me.  I just cannot accept their teaching on covenant theology and especially the single covenant of grace view.

My purpose here is to point out my objections to Covenant Theology as explained by Louis Berkhof in chapter 13 of his book, A Summary of Christian Doctrine.  While I believe new covenant theology bests explains redemptive history, I am not going to attempt to explain my view of it here.  This article will focus totally on my objections to one aspect of covenant theology known as the covenant of grace.  

A. covenant of grace defined
Berkhof presents the covenant theology perspective that a single covenant of grace covers all of redemptive history after the fall of Adam, rather than a series of historical biblical covenants that are presented in Scripture.  This is the part of covenant theology that I will address.  Since Scripture does not mention a covenant of grace that covers all of redemptive history, it is entirely a theologically deduced covenant.  I think it would be correct to call this period a part of the gospel of grace, but not the covenant of grace.  Paul says in Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God.  In the book of Romans Paul explains this gospel.  He never refers to a covenant of grace in any of his epistles.

NOTE:  Direct quotes from Berkhof’s book will be italicized and underlined in this article.    

Berkhof gives the following definition for the covenant of grace: So conceived, it may be defined as that gracious agreement between God and the elect sinner in Christ, in which God gives Himself with all the blessings of salvation to the elect sinner, and the latter embraces God and all His gracious gifts by faith.

Berkhof presents the covenant theology perspective that a single covenant of grace covers all of redemptive history after the fall of Adam, rather than a series of historical biblical covenants that are presented in Scripture.  The different biblical covenants are viewed as different administrations of the one covenant of grace.  This is the part of Covenant Theology that I will address.  Since Scripture does not mention a covenant of grace, it is entirely a theologically deduced covenant. 

B. Parties of the Covenant
Berkhof states: The contracting parties. God is the first party in the covenant. He establishes the covenant and determines the relation in which the second party will stand to Him. It is not so easy to determine who the second party is. The prevailing opinion in Reformed circles is that it is the elect sinner in Christ. 

It is understandable that it is difficult for covenant theologians to determine who the second party in the covenant of grace is since the deduced covenant of grace spans several historic biblical covenants that are between God and different parties.  Covenant theology claims that all of Abraham’s descendents were in the Covenant of Promise.  This would mean both elect and non-elect were parties in this covenant instead of just the elect sinner in Christ.  No wonder it is not easy for Reformed circles to determine who the second party is in the Covenant of Grace since they have a contradiction before they get out of Genesis 17.  While the covenant of circumcision was made with all of Abraham’s physical descendents, the covenant of promise made with Abraham was made with the elect and not all the physical offspring of Abraham as Paul explains in Romans 9:6-8, “But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.”  Paul is pretty clear here.  It is the children of the promise who are Abraham’s offspring, not the children of the flesh [physical descendents]. 

Then 430 years later God made another covenant at Mt. Sinai with the people that God delivered out of Egypt and them alone.  Deut. 5:3 Not with our fathers did the Lord make this covenant, but with us, who are all of us here alive today.  Therefore, the Mosaic or Old Covenant was made with the nation of Israel and them alone.  This covenant had a beginning at Mt. Sinai and it had an end when Jesus was crucified on the cross of Calvary.  Many and in fact most of these people were not saved [Heb. 3:16-19, Rom. 9:27].  Therefore, Covenant theology fails to acknowledge that most of those with whom God made the Mosaic Covenant were not saved.  They were not elect.   

I will agree that it is hard to determine the parties in the mythical Covenant of Grace since the parties change in the different covenants.  However, if each covenant is treated as presented in the Holy Bible, it is not hard at all to determine whom the parties are and how the covenants work together in a unified gospel of grace.

C. Promises of the Covenant
Berkhof states: The promises of the covenant. The main promise of the covenant, which includes all others, is contained in the oft repeated words, "I will be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee," This promise includes all others, such as the promise of temporal blessings, of justification, of the Spirit of God, and of final glorification in a life that never ends.

In this statement Berkhof  clearly asserts that the promise includes justification, glorification and eternal life.  Therefore, when a person is in this covenant relationship with God, they have been regenerated and redeemed.

However, Berkhof also states: It is evident that the Bible sometimes speaks of the covenant as including some in whom the promises are never realized, such as Ishmael, Esau, the wicked sons of Eli, and the rebellious Israelites who died in their sins.  What?  How can God’s promises not be realized?  God promises eternal life through the covenant, but it is not realized in some who are included in the covenant!  How can this be? 

Some will say it was because they didn’t meet the requirements of the covenant.  But Berkhof also states: Moreover, it should be borne in mind that even the requirements are covered by the promises: God gives man all that He requires of him.   If some are included in the covenant of promise and God gives all he requires to be in the covenant, then how can some not receive the promises?  Has the Word of God failed?  This makes no sense and it is impossible for all three of these statements to be correct. 

Paul explains in Romans 9 which one of these three statements is incorrect and that is Berkhof’s assertion that the covenant of promise includes some who never receive the promises.  Paul states in Romans 9:6-8 that it is NOT the children of the flesh who are Abraham’s offspring, but it is the children of the promise are counted as offspring.  Therefore, Ishmael, Esau, the wicked sons of Eli, and the rebellious Israelites who died in their sins were NOT included in the covenant of promise even though they were included in the covenant of circumcision. 

D. Requirements of the Covenant

Berkhof states: Moreover, it should be borne in mind that even the requirements are covered by the promises: God gives man all that He requires of him. The two things which He demands of those who stand in covenant relationship to Him are (a) that they accept the covenant and the covenant promises by faith, and thus enter upon the life of the covenant; and (b) that from the principle of the new life born within them, they consecrate themselves to God in new obedience.

This does not make sense to me.  Those who are in covenant relationship with God must accept the covenant promises by faith in order to enter the covenant???  It would make sense if they were NOT in covenant relationship and through faith entered into covenant relationship, but how can you be in the covenant before faith and enter the same covenant by faith.  These are the kind of assertions that make the covenant of grace very complicated and confusing for me. 

E. Characteristics of the Covenant

(1) Berkhof states: It is grace from start to finish. It is also an eternal and inviolable covenant, to which God will always be true, though men may break it.

Berkhof here asserts that those included in the covenant are secure in the covenant even though they may break the covenant.  He also said earlier the promises were not realized in many that were included in the covenant such as Ishmael, Esau, and rebellious Israelites [see above].  I don’t know how you reconcile this contradiction, as both assertions cannot be true.  They were either not included in the covenant or they were not secure in the covenant.  It can’t be both.   

(2) Berkhof states speaking of the covenant of grace: It is essentially the same in all dispensations, though the form of its administration changes.

Well this is just not accurate as Hebrews 8:8,9 points out, “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, 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.”  First this text says ‘establish a new covenant’, not change an existing covenant.  Then it states that this new covenant is not like the mosaic covenant.  I don’t think ‘essentially the same’ reconciles with ‘not like’.  Verse 6 states that the ministry of Christ is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises.  From this passage in Hebrews, how can anyone say the new covenant is essentially the same as the old covenant?  You can’t!  Paul also declared that new covenant believers were not under law, but under grace and the old covenant was a ministry of death.  He also declared himself to be a minister of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the spirit.           

F.  Membership in the Covenant

(1) Berkhof states: From the preceding it follows that unregenerate persons may temporarily be in the covenant as a purely legal relationship.

This is not accurate with either the Mosaic covenant or the new covenant.   In the Mosaic covenant the entire nation of Israel was in a permanent covenant relationship with God whether or not they were regenerate.  The new covenant as defined in Hebrews 8 is made up of nothing but regenerate saved Christians and has no temporary members.  Therefore, neither of these covenants includes anyone on a temporary basis.  The Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant represent nearly all of redemptive history as revealed in the Holy Bible and neither have temporary covenant members.

(2) Berkhof states: Children of believers, however, enter the covenant as a legal arrangement by birth, but this does not necessarily mean that they also at once enter it as a communion of life, nor even that they will ever enter it in that sense.

Berkhof here asserts that children of believers enter into the covenant as a legal arrangement at birth, but they may never enter it as a communion of life.  From #1 above these children are temporarily in the covenant at birth and some of them prove to be unregenerate and are expelled when they become covenant breakers.  Hebrews 8 alone disproves this view, and Paul in Romans 9 makes it clear that it is not the children of the flesh that are the children of God.  Paul even goes on in Romans 9 to state that while Esau was in the womb with Jacob, which was before either had done anything good or bad, God said, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”  If ever there was a full-blooded covenant child it was Esau.  Does this mean God hates some covenant children before they even have a chance to be covenant breakers?  The Bible gives no support for children of believers being born into the new covenant in any way and although Abraham’s descendents in the Old Testament were born in into the physical covenant of circumcision, they were not included in the covenant of promise according to Paul in Romans 9.  

G. Different dispensations of the Covenant

Berkhof states: The covenant at Sinai is essentially the same as that established with Abraham, but now takes in the whole nation of Israel, and thus became a national covenant. Though it strongly stresses the keeping of the law, it should not be regarded as a renewed covenant of works.
It strongly stresses keeping the law????  No, it was a legal or works covenant that required keeping the law.  The covenant contract was the Ten Commandments.  Deuteronomy 4:13 And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone.  AND   Exodus 34:27,28 And the LORD said to Moses, “Write these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.” So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights. He neither ate bread nor drank water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments. him. All the people answered together and said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do.” And Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD.

While it had a gracious purpose, pointed to mercy, and a coming redeemer, the covenant at Sinai promised blessings for obedience to the law and curses for disobedience to the law.  It did more than strongly stress the keeping of the law since keeping the law was the very terms of the covenant as pointed out in Exodus 19:5,6 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.”  Israel responded by accepting the terms of the Mosaic covenant.  Exodus 19:7,8 So Moses came and called the elders of the people and set before them all these words that the LORD had commanded him. All the people answered together and said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do.” And Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD.

This does not mean anyone other than Jesus Christ succeeded in keeping this covenant or that no one was redeemed under this covenant.  The remnant that was saved under the old covenant was saved by faith in the coming redeemer.

H. Covenant breakers

Berkhof states: The covenant of grace is a GRACIOUS covenant, because it is a fruit and manifestation of the grace of God to sinners. It is grace from start to finish. It is also an eternal and inviolable covenant, to which God will always be true, though men may break it.

By asserting both the old and new covenants are just one covenant some contradictions and problems arise with this statement.
1) How can men break a covenant that Berkhop states that God gives man all he requires of him to be in the covenant? 
2) How can God be said to be true to his covenant promise if men are expelled from it due to breaking it? 

When you consider each of these covenants as they are presented in Scripture, the confusion clears up.  Men can break the old covenant as Hebrews 8:9 states in speaking of the old covenant:  For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.  Men broke the old covenant and God was true to his word as spelled out in the terms of the old [Mosaic] covenant.  In the new covenant God gives man all he requires.  Therefore, God is true to his word and man cannot break covenant per the terms of the new covenant.  God states in Hebrews 8:12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.     

In Exodus 19:5 God says: “Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples,……… Speaking of new covenant believers Peter says in 1 Peter 2:9: But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.  The distinction between old covenant members [Israel] and new covenant members [believers] couldn’t be more striking.  With the old covenant it is IF YOU OBEY and with new covenant members it is YOU ARE A CHOSEN RACE.   

Summary

Sinners were saved by grace alone through faith alone throughout redemptive history including the old [Mosaic] covenant and all the covenants had a gracious purpose in God’s plan.  However, when there are so many major differences in the covenants, I don’t see how it is possible to arbitrarily deduce that they are all actually just one covenant when Scripture does not report it that way.  There is certainly one gospel of grace that covers the entire period, but I believe Scripture shows this is done with separate covenants that have different parties covered, different promises, different requirements, and different characteristics.  Old covenant membership is based on physical birth, whereas new covenant membership is based on the Spirit giving a new heart and spiritual life.  Paul points out in Romans 9:27 that only a remnant of old covenant Israel was saved, while 100% of those born of God in the new covenant are saved [Rom. 8:29-30].  God gives all he requires to covenant members in the new covenant of grace including the faith to believe, but old covenant members [Israel] was under law and only a remnant was saved by God’s grace.  The bottom line difference is that old covenant membership was by physical birth, while new covenant membership is by spiritual birth.  This precludes any possibility that children of believers are in the new covenant by physical birth.