A Review of Covenantal & Dispensational Theologies from IVP
I Saw the Light
A few years ago I served in a Church plant in Berlin, Germany, and we were asked to send a photo of our pastor to our founding Church. He spoke no German, and so we thought it would be high time to play a game with him.
We chose a bible verse, something like 1 Samuel 14:27, the final words of which translate as “und seine Augen wurden hell” and printed each word out on a card and got a few people, himself included, to hold a card up. Smiling, he held up the card which said, “Hell” on it. We sent the photo back to the church he’d previously served at for years and it was then used for quite some time in prayer meetings, newsletters and the like, he was not best pleased. We found it hilarious.
That wouldn’t happen within the English language though? Right? Well, if I held up a card with the word ‘Progressive’ on it what comes to mind? Is it positive, negative? Political, theological? To take it a step further, how many different meanings of that word do you think you could come up with if you had 10, 15, or 70x7 people in the room with you?
From the off, you need to be aware that not only are there words used in this book that hold different meanings from the ones you might be most familiar with, but also—whether they would openly say so or not—the authors differ on their own meanings of the words too, to one degree or another.
These words include, but I’m sure are not limited to progressive, traditional, covenant, and dispensations. What’s more, from time to time, the differences between theological convictions, as well as arguments for/against them, are somewhat obfuscated.
Remember: Words, even in the same language, do not always mean the same thing, even in the same profession and faith.
I want to say this from the start because if you’re already convinced that you should read this book, this is the most important thing you need to know before tackling it.
United
This book explores the differences between four major theological frameworks held primarily by those who would affirm the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, that the Bible hold ultimate authority, and that though creeds, confessions, elders, and deacons hold some authority, none on the same level as the Bible, not even close.
I won’t discuss the differences here, you should read the book to find out about those, but rather, as is characteristic of my reviews, I want to explain why and how you should read this book.
First of all, you should know that this shared conviction is of utmost importance to all of the authors, and all of them would affirm each other as brothers in Christ and servants of the King. Darrell L. Bock puts it like this:
“A theological system is an articulation of what most holds the Scripture together. In the case of the essays in this book, all of us are making a case for the view we think makes the most sense of the whole with the least number of problems. There are many judgments being made by all of us about what seems most coherent. This is very much an in-house, family discussion within evangelicalism. That needs to be remembered, since what we hold in common is in many ways far more important.”
Too often our differences—secondary differences, or worse still tertiary ones—keep us from saying things like Bock just said. To be clear, I’ve chosen Bock for two reasons:
I disagree with his theological position
He said it best and his essay was by far the most gracious
I have not chosen the theologian I most agree so I can illustrate this point by saying, “Look how well we do this in our camp,” I’ve chosen a brother who has, in my estimation, carried out his work here in the most gracious and ecumenical way, so I can say, “Look how well we as Christians, all of stripes and denominations, should do this.”
With that said.
Difference → Division? Why distinguish?
A book like this will not lead everyone to join hands, rejoice and sing Kumbaya together. For some, it will do the opposite, so why read it at all, don’t differences in opinion simply breed division? By no means.
Differences don’t cause division, people do.
My wife Anna and I are faced with something in the region of 1000 different decisions we need to make a week, and that’s a conservative estimate. Even if we say that 99% of the time we agree completely, that would still leave 10 decisions a week we would disagree on. If we get into an argument, is it:
a. The opinions fault?
or
b. Our fault?
Oh how I wish I could blame it on the opinions but we all know that’s just not the case. We are responsible for how we deal with those differences. This is especially important when one of us wants the desk to be 91cmx30cmx60cm and the other wants it to be 90cmx30cmx60cm (the great desk controversy of 2019) or one of us holds to Covenant Theology and the other to Covenant Theology + Credobaptism.
Is there a case to be made for eschewing the opinions that cause division entirely? It’s all a matter of worth. If you and I were given 100,000 pounds/dollars, it would be important to know what each of us thought we should do with it. We might come to different conclusions, but it's important that we understand why we think what we do, that we have good reasons for thinking so, and that we understand that the provision ultimately came from God. $100,000 is worth a lot, and I’m sure you would have opinions of what to do with it if you were offered it (watch Mr Beast’s videos on YouTube if you’re not convinced of that.) God, and the price Jesus paid so that you could come into a relationship with him is of so much more worth. If that is true, it should lead us to discover more of who He is, the depths of His love, the extent of His sovereignty, the words in His holy scriptures, the ways in which they fit together, and the ways in which they don’t.
Don’t get me wrong here, I have my contender for the most well-thought-out theological framework out of the four represented in this book, but it would be better that you pick this book up, read it, and go away confused but knowing that these four men love one another and love God and that’s the only thing you’re sure about, than simply read it and agree with what I say because I say it, or what Horton, Wellum, Bock, or Snoebeger think because they’ve said it.
“If I speak human or angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so that I can move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give away all my possessions, and if I give over my body in order to boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.”
Christian Standard Bible, (Holman Bible Publishers, 2020), 1 Corinthians 13:1-3
Grace and Peace,
Adsum Try Ravenhill