Dispensationalism Vs. Covenant Theology

What are the differences between dispensationalists and those who believe in covenant theology?

[gracealone]

I am a dispensationalist and I Love my brothers and sisters who are Covenanters.

[thenarrowgate]

A word of advice to both sides, do NOT lean on YOUR own understanding when reading the word of GOD. We live in the world but we are not of the world. So we must put aside our biases worldviews and perspectives to gain the truth wisdom and knowledge of God through His Word.

[alastaircooper]

I've been on both sides of this argument. Raised under dispensationalism and now moving towards covenant rheology. The arguments are complicated and you cannot simplify it in a presentation like this. Respectfully I would say this gentleman is misrepresentating the covenant theology argument. And I say that as someone who thinks there are pros and cons to both views. He has not explained CT fairly. And that is the biggest problem in all this - the different sides misrepresent the other.

[squadauto]

The more I am re-listening to all this the more I cannot not believe I was so blind to the word. I am thankful for that I can recognize the difference in the sense that my hermeneutical understanding is growing and changing. His way of looking at scripture literally sounds good but is not the way we are taught in the New Testament.

[HisImage-bqzb]

How can you approach the Bible honestly and literally without understanding that God deals with different groups at different places in time?

[SNAKEPIT]

This is what you get when you let a group of intellectuals loose on something. They feel the need to label and categorize everything. That then distorts and twists God's word and causes confusion. Read the Bible for yourselves folks. With reading, get wisdom and with the getting of wisdom get understanding.

[whatistruth]

John, I respect you and have learned a lot from your teachings. I do think it is wrong how you characterized covenantal theology. Normally you are pretty fair to the other side but I felt that this was somewhat of a straw man.
Allegorical interpretation does not come from Origen but from the New Testament. Paul, comparing Israel according to the flesh and the Church, writes to the Galatians:

“Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

He says we, in the Church, are heirs according to promise. He says there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Christ and that those of faith are the sons of Abraham. He also says all the promises are yes and Amen in Christ! Not to mention he said that the verse “you shall not muzzle an oxen while treading the grain” was written for our sakes speaking about ministers of the gospel earning their living from the gospel. You can’t read the New Testament without noticing this style of interpretation.
We interpret the scriptures as Jesus and the Apostles did because they are the authority. We have the Spirit and can understand the Old Testament because anyone who turns to the Lord has the veil removed. The Jews killed the Christ for this very reason. They were blinded by unbelief. They thought the Christ would only be a human political leader descended from David. They took the scriptures too literally. Prophecy has always involved spiritual truth that needs to be discerned. One needs the Spirit to understand. For the carnal mind cannot understand the things of God.
When Jesus said “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.” He was speaking allegorically or spiritually because no Old Testament prophecy says those literal words. He’s most likely referring to the river flowing from the new temple in Ezekiel 47 which we know from Corinthians that our body is a temple and the church itself is the temple of God. It’s the same when he spoke of tearing down the temple and rebuilding it in three days. This is the Biblical interpretation of scripture not to mention traditional Christian interpretation of scripture as dispensationalism didn’t even come around until the 1830s with John Darby.

[dillondavis]

The way He represents covenant theology is just not fair at all.

[elroyswarts]

For a long time I have actually tried to understand what these two concepts are, and how they differ.This video certainly casts a lot of light on the subject.Thanks for sharing.

[dehsa]

For you Covenanters Exodus 22:22-24. It's funny how the human race always wants to make a mystery out of the obvious; overreact to the simple; and confuse the definite. I'm so glad I found you. I frequently recall your story of a woman named Young, who knew she was going to be martyred. She told her young sons to look for a small congregation of believers, they would have the truth. And so it is. The larger portion of believers prefer to make understanding things harder than they need to be.

[spritualfitness]

This is so good. Currently studying dispensationalism and this helps greatly.

[brianmgrim]

⁠​​⁠ Let’s not forget the importance of practical applications here, too. The classical Dispensationalist tells me Gen. 12:3 means I’m cursed if I don’t bless Abraham’s blood descendants. Gal. 6:10 tells me to practice discrimination, not by blood, but by faith: ‘Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.’ Is the Bible intra-contradictory, or does the New Covenant supersede the Old?

[beatim]

That is about the least honest description of Covenant Theology I've heard. "They basically say, if the Bible says something, it must mean something else." You can't help people by lying.

[johnspartan]

What you are referring to as hyperdispensationalism is actually Biblical Dispensationalism.
Peter and the disciples received the Gospel of the Kingdom from Jesus.
Paul received his Gospel of Grace directly from Jesus by divine revelation.
Jesus did not reveal Paul's Gospel directly to Peter, James, John or any of the other Apostles.
Paul was chosen by Jesus to be the apostle to the Gentiles. (Romans 11:13; Romans 15:16; Ephesians 3:1; 2 Timothy 1:11).
In Romans 2:16, Romans 16:25, and 2 Timothy 2:8, Paul calls the Gospel he received “my gospel.” The Bible says the Gospel of the Grace of God was committed to Paul’s trust. Acts 20:24; 1 Timothy 1:11

The transition from the Gospel of the Kingdom to Paul's Gospel is described in the Book of Acts. Paul explains how he got his Gospel directly from the risen and glorified Jesus and not from man. He had to convince Peter, James, and John that his Gospel was from God. After they accepted Paul's Gospel they stopped requiring gentiles to observe the law of Moses, dietary laws, water baptism, circumcision, sabbath observance. etc.. Acts 15.


When Jesus revealed to Peter that all foods were made clean, it was to prepare Peter's understanding to accept Paul's Gospel to the Gentiles. Peter had to learn to sit and eat with Gentiles, something he would have never done without God giving Peter that vision.
*_“the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest”_* (Romans 16:25-26). The glorified and exalted Jesus revealed that secret through the ministry of the Apostle Paul (Paul’s epistles: Romans through Philemon.
*_"Now I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the good news that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin. For I did not receive it from any person, nor was I taught it, but I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. For you have heard about my former way of life in Judaism, how intensely I was persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many my own age among my people, because I was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me so that I could proclaim the good news about him among the Gentiles, immediately I did not consult with flesh and blood, neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days."_*
Galatians 1:11-18
*_“This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.”_* 1 Timothy 1:15-16:

The word tells us to follow Paul as he follows Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1;
1 Corinthians 4:16; Ephesians 5:1; Philippians 3:17; 1 Thessalonians 1:6).
There is no command to follow Peter, James, or John in the Bible. Why? Paul is “the apostle to the Gentiles” (Romans 11:13; Romans 15:16; 2 Timothy 1:11).
Peter, James, and John were apostles to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 10:5-7; Matthew 19:27, 28; Galatians 2:9).

When Jews asked the Apostle Peter, “What must we do to be saved?, ” notice Peter’s answer:
*_“Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts _**_2:38_**_; cf. Acts _**_3:19_**_)._*
However, when the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “What must I do to be saved?, ” notice what Paul and Silas declared:
*_“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”_* (Acts 16:31).
Obviously, these are not the same message. Peter told people to repent and then get water baptized, so they could receive forgiveness of sins and receive the Holy Spirit.
Paul simply taught that salvation comes by “believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, ” without preaching water baptism. Repentance under Paul's Gospel is the act of believing because believing is a change of heart. When you believe, you have turned from unbelief to belief, which is repentance.

The reason we have divisions among us is because people are not dividing the word of truth and applying it to the intended target group.
Some Christians say water baptism is essential. Others say baptism is not essential.
Some say we have to keep the sabbath. Others say we do not have to keep the sabbath.
Some say we cannot eat pork, shellfish, etc.. Others say it doesn't matter what we eat.
Some groups say we have to obey the Law of Moses. Other's say we do not have to obey the law of Moses.
Some say salvation requires works of faith.
Others say salvation results in faith that works.

The resurrected and glorified Jesus revealed to Paul the “revelation of the mystery” (Romans 16:25; Galatians 1:11-18; Ephesians 3:1-11; Colossians 1:25-26).
Peter, James, and John did not receive “the revelation of the mystery” from Jesus, but rather, they received it from Paul.
Read what the Apostle Peter wrote toward the end of his life:

*_"And regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation, even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things (in which are some things that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction)."_* 2 Peter 3:15-16

Peter states he did not understand all of Paul's writings and teachings. The reason is that Jesus selected Peter as an apostle to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 10:5-7; Galatians 2:9). Peter did not need to understand Paul’s doctrine, because Peter preached the Gospel of the Kingdom to the Jews.

The Gospel of Grace is exclusive to Paul’s ministry. Paul's Gospel is not the same as the Gospel of the Kingdom that Peter and the disciples preached to the Jews.
The distinctions between the two gospels are so obvious that anyone who does not see it does not want to see it. The verses are in plain English, and no seminary degree is necessary. If one disagrees with any of these verses cited above, he or she is denying God’s Word and arguing against Almighty God .
*_“If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.”_*
(1 Corinthians 14:37-38).
*_“I (Paul) went up by revelation, and communicated unto them (Peter, James, and John) that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles….”_*

*_"But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should proclaim to you a good news contrary to the good news we proclaimed you, let him be accursed."_* Galatians 1:8
Paul taught them the Gospel that Jesus Christ had committed to his trust (a Gospel message Jesus had NOT committed to James, Peter, and John).
Paul and Peter preached two different Gospels.
The two different gospels are not contradictory when they are applied to the two distinct groups they are meant for: Israel and the Church. They are only contradictory when people try to apply both Gospels to the Church which ends up causing divisions among believers.
*_“But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:).”_*
Galatians 2:7-8 KJV
You cannot apply James doctrine of "works" to the Body of Christ that are saved through Paul's Gospel. Look at the first verse in James. He is addressing the 12 tribes of Israel....not gentile or Jewish believers that have been "called out" from among the nations through the preaching of Paul's Gospel.

This is Biblical my friend. There is nothing hyper about it. Jesus preached the Gospel of the Kingdom to the Jews. The Kingdom on earth was promised to the Jews. The Church is a new revelation. Paul's Gospel was a new revelation. The Body of Christ has it's inheritance in Heaven. The Body of Christ are promised to be made immortal like Jesus. No such promises were made to Israel. The Body of Christ will assist Jesus and the inhabitants that come through the tribulation, but the earthly Kingdom in never promised to the Church. That promise is to Israel.

[clandestine]

This is why Calvary church is blessed and growing because they dont mess with the Scriptures and the covenant God has made with Israel. I learned new insight from this video. Thanks!!!

[thesourcerer]

Thanks so much for your input and insight much appreciated.

[EnfieldA]

I become suspicious of any organized attempt to shroud the plain meanings of [text] within narrowly defined terms used by "the wise" to course a line of thinking advantageous to them.

[skibbydogg]

Thank you for explaining this so well. I just naturally take things literally and never understood CT arrived at their understanding through allegorical interpretations. That really clarifies a lot!

[Mike]

Rev. 5:10 says those from every tribe, nation, language, and nation will reign with Christ on the earth, not just the Jews.

[jgons]

I’ve never heard any Covenant Theologian say salvation was differently a different point ever. Abraham didn’t work his way to heaven, it was credited to him righteousness when he had nothing to offer. I feel this teacher has studied very little of actual covenant theology. Not to mention he’s lumping it into just 2... but there are many covenants pre-cross. Adamic. Noahic. Abrahamic. Mosaic. Davidic....