Covenant Theology or Progressive Covenantalism

Both Covenant Theology and Progressive Covenantalism earnestly aim to honor Scripture, but they offer different interpretations that are ultimately mutually exclusive on several key points. The question, then, is not a matter of subjective preference but of determining which system most closely aligns with the intent of Scripture. This requires examining which theological framework best accounts for the entirety of biblical revelation, maintains coherence with the whole counsel of God, and reflects the underlying unity of God's redemptive purposes as revealed in the Bible.

To address this question, let’s consider several core aspects where these systems diverge and assess which aligns more closely with what Scripture seems to present as its intent.

Key Points of Divergence and Scriptural Assessment

1. The Overarching Covenant Framework

   Scriptural Consideration:
   The Bible presents a unified narrative of redemption centered on Christ (Luke 24:27; Ephesians 1:10). Passages like Genesis 3:15, which promise a future Redeemer, and Galatians 3:16, which identifies Christ as the ultimate "seed" of Abraham, suggest an overarching continuity in God’s redemptive plan. Covenant Theology’s emphasis on a single Covenant of Grace fits this biblical pattern of a continuous, unfolding plan from creation to new creation. Additionally, Paul's writings, such as in Romans 5:12-21, draw a parallel between Adam and Christ, suggesting a covenantal framework that hinges on representative heads—a concept foundational to the Covenant of Works and Grace model.

   Conclusion: Covenant Theology's framework of a Covenant of Works and a Covenant of Grace seems to better capture the unified and overarching nature of God’s redemptive work as presented in Scripture.

   • Covenant Theology posits two primary theological covenants: the Covenant of Works (with Adam) and the Covenant of Grace (unfolding after the Fall and culminating in Christ). This framework is built on the idea that there is a single, unified plan of salvation throughout Scripture, centered on the person and work of Christ.
   • Progressive Covenantalism rejects the Covenant of Works and a single Covenant of Grace, instead proposing that each biblical covenant (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, New) stands as distinct but progressively unfolding God's plan.

2. Role and Identity of Israel and the Church

   Scriptural Consideration:
   Several New Testament passages support the idea of the Church as the continuation or fulfillment of Israel. For example, Romans 2:28-29 speaks of a "Jew" as one inwardly, and Galatians 6:16 refers to believers as the "Israel of God." Ephesians 2:11-22 presents Jews and Gentiles being united in Christ into “one new man,” indicating continuity and a merging of identities in the people of God. Hebrews 8-10, which discusses the New Covenant, also emphasizes fulfillment rather than replacement or a completely new identity, portraying the Church as the realization of the promises made to Israel.

   Conclusion: The New Testament’s portrayal of the Church as inheriting and fulfilling the promises made to Israel aligns more closely with the Covenant Theology perspective, which sees a fundamental continuity between Israel and the Church.

   • Covenant Theology sees the Church as the true Israel, the continuation of the people of God, composed of all believers in Christ (both Jew and Gentile). The Church inherits the promises made to Israel, fulfilled in Christ.
   • Progressive Covenantalism emphasizes a new creation community inaugurated by the New Covenant. While acknowledging the fulfillment of Old Testament promises in Christ, it avoids directly identifying the Church as "new Israel," emphasizing instead a new identity for the people of God.

3. Continuity and Discontinuity of the Covenants

   Scriptural Consideration:
   The New Testament supports both continuity and transformation in relation to the law. Jesus’ affirmation in Matthew 5:17-19 that He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it points to a continuity in moral principles, yet He also reinterprets the Law’s application (e.g., Matthew 5:21-48). Paul teaches in Romans 3:31 that faith does not nullify the law but upholds it, suggesting continuity. However, he also speaks of the Law as a tutor leading to Christ (Galatians 3:24-25), indicating a shift in how the law is to be applied under the New Covenant.

   Conclusion: While both systems can account for aspects of continuity and discontinuity, Covenant Theology's emphasis on the ongoing validity of the moral law and its understanding of the covenants as expressions of a singular Covenant of Grace seem to better align with the broader biblical witness.

   • Covenant Theology maintains a high degree of continuity between the covenants, especially regarding the moral law, which remains binding upon all believers as a reflection of God’s unchanging character.
   • Progressive Covenantalism acknowledges both continuity and discontinuity. It argues that the Mosaic Law, including the Ten Commandments, was part of a covenant that has been fulfilled in Christ, and therefore, believers are not under the law in the same way but under the "Law of Christ," which emphasizes love and moral guidance as mediated by Christ’s teachings and the Spirit.

4. Hermeneutical Approach to the Old and New Testaments

   Scriptural Consideration:
   The New Testament writers often reinterpret the Old Testament in light of Christ. For example, the author of Hebrews reinterprets the Old Covenant sacrificial system as pointing to Christ's final sacrifice (Hebrews 9-10), and Paul sees the promises to Abraham as finding their ultimate fulfillment in Christ and those united to Him (Galatians 3:16-29). This hermeneutical approach suggests that interpreting the Old Testament in light of the New is warranted by Scripture itself.

   Conclusion: Covenant Theology’s approach of reading the Old Testament through the lens of the New aligns with the interpretive practices demonstrated by New Testament authors.

   • Covenant Theology reads the Old Testament through the lens of the New Testament, seeing types and shadows fulfilled in Christ. It often interprets Old Testament promises spiritually, understanding their ultimate fulfillment in Christ and His Church.
   • Progressive Covenantalism also acknowledges typology and fulfillment but emphasizes understanding texts within their historical and covenantal contexts before considering their fulfillment in Christ. It seeks a more straightforward reading of how covenants are realized in redemptive history.

5. Sacraments and Their Meaning
   
   Scriptural Consideration: While the New Testament does not provide an explicit command for infant baptism, Covenant Theology often appeals to passages like Acts 2:38-39 as significant evidence for the practice of infant baptism, particularly because of the covenantal language used by Peter that echoes the promises made to Abraham in the Old Testament. This argument rests on the understanding that there is continuity between the Old and New Testaments regarding how God includes the children of believers in His covenant community. By repeating this language, Peter connects the New Covenant inaugurated by Christ with the Abrahamic Covenant, implying that just as the children of believers were included in the Old Covenant community through circumcision, they should also be included in the New Covenant community through baptism. Peter's audience was primarily Jewish, well-versed in the Old Testament Scriptures and in God’s covenant dealings with Israel. When Peter says, "the promise is for you and for your children," his Jewish listeners would naturally understand this in light of their covenantal context. They would likely interpret this as Peter affirming that God’s covenantal promises, which included their children under the Old Covenant, still applied in the New Covenant. If Peter had intended to exclude children from the New Covenant sign of baptism, it would have been a major theological shift and likely required explicit clarification, given that his Jewish audience would expect the inclusion of children, as was the practice with circumcision. In the Old Testament, circumcision was the sign of entry into the covenant community and was applied to male infants of believing parents (Genesis 17:10-12). In the New Testament, baptism is seen as the new sign of the covenant, replacing circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12). Covenant Theology argues that the sign of the covenant should continue to be applied to believers and their children. Just as circumcision was administered to infants in the Old Covenant to signify their inclusion in the covenant community, baptism, as the sign of the New Covenant, should be administered to the children of believers, signifying their inclusion in the covenant community. However, Progressive Covenantalists argue that the New Testament examples of baptism (Acts 8:12, 16:31-34) involve personal faith and repentance, suggesting a discontinuity in the application of the covenant sign

• ​​​Covenant Theology practices paedobaptism, seeing baptism as a sign of the New Covenant similar to circumcision in the Old Covenant. It views the sacraments as means of grace within the covenant community, applied to both believers and their children.
• Progressive Covenantalism typically advocates credobaptism (believer’s baptism), emphasizing the New Covenant as a community of believers who consciously profess faith in Christ. It does not see a direct correlation between circumcision and baptism.

Conclusion: This area remains contentious, but Covenant Theology’s argument for continuity in covenant signs relies on a more consistent application of the concept of covenant membership.

Final Assessment: Which System Best Mirrors the Intent of Scripture?

Based on the scriptural considerations outlined above:

• Covenant Theology appears to provide a more comprehensive and coherent framework that aligns with the overarching narrative of Scripture. Its emphasis on the unity of God’s redemptive plan, the continuity of the covenants in Christ, and the inclusion of the Church as the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel reflect the New Testament’s interpretive stance. It captures the consistent biblical theme of one people of God, united in Christ, and a moral law that reflects God's unchanging character.

• Progressive Covenantalism offers helpful insights into the progressive nature of revelation and the importance of understanding each covenant in its historical context. However, its reluctance to use overarching covenantal categories (like the Covenant of Works and Covenant of Grace) and its emphasis on both continuity and discontinuity can sometimes create ambiguity regarding the unifying themes of Scripture.

Conclusion

While both systems contribute valuable perspectives to understanding Scripture, Covenant Theology seems to more closely mirror the intent of Scripture as a unified, coherent narrative centered on God’s covenantal relationship with His people, culminating in Christ. This is because it accounts for the broad sweep of biblical revelation, maintains a strong sense of continuity and fulfillment, and aligns with the interpretive practices of the New Testament writers.