When I joined the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, I was attempting to major on the majors. At the time, I was a Progressive Covenantalist (known previously through John Reisinger, Tom Wells, & Fred Zaspel as New Covenant Theology1) but was willing to overlook what I thought were errors to benefit from the robust polity & liturgy that the Orthodox Presbyterian Church provides. One evening, when talking with my pastor, I was surprised by his belief that “There is no logical medium between Covenant Theology & Dispensationalism. As someone who had long ago turned away from the Left Behind brand of eschatology, this statement had me clutching pearls. Progressive Covenantalism is a system that allows systematic theology to be informed by biblical theology. I was reading the Bible at its word, or so I thought at the time.
Progressive Covenantalism is built upon the framework of interpreting the Bible explicitly, as Reisinger stated once – “The basic presuppositions of any system of theology must be established with specific texts of Scripture and not with theological terms. Otherwise, our basic building blocks will be the product of logic and not of the Word of God itself. We must not produce a theological lingo derived only by ‘good and necessary consequences’ deduced from our system, and then force those theological terms into the Scripture, refusing to allow the words used by the Holy Spirit to mean what they actually say…”2
I remember at the time a pivotal passage to my understanding of Progressive Covenantalism was II Corinthians 3 where the text pits the ministry of death against the ministry of the Spirit. I would clearly point to this passage against Covenant Theology that the Mosaic Covenant did not have any grace. However, the further I dug into this, the more I realized that my pastor was correct. If I took away grace from Sinai, how were the faithful Israelites saved?
Progressive Covenantalism, while distancing itself from Dispensationalism, uses a Dispensational Hermeneutic as a framework for scripture. Regarding the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, Progressive Covenantalism divides the Word of Truth. Rather than chopping up Scripture into seven distinct parts, Progressive Covenantalism chops up Scripture into two. This leads to the inevitable question: Is the Old Testament obsolete? Most adherents to Progressive Covenantalism would say no, however they typically use this exact reasoning to explain why Christians are not to uphold the Sabbath as a day of rest on Sunday.3
As I studied, I realized this was not the case. Jesus’ testimony is definitive: “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17, a reference to the OT, since the NT was not yet written). If the Old Testament is “truth,” then it can teach doctrine. How can God’s truth not be capable of teaching doctrine (2 Tim. 3:16)? While some Progressive Covenantalism proponents will claim that the Mosaic Covenant scriptures are no longer law but are “prophecy & wisdom”4this ignores swaths of commands provided by God. While they discard the literal grammatical hermeneutic of dispensationalism, they still hold to a theme of disunity, pitting texts that speak of The New Covenant against the Old Testament.
This is seen in their position that the Church was born on the Day of Pentecost and does not include Old Testament saints. How does this not lead to essentially two religions, two ways of salvation, two peoples of God (two churches), both sanctioned by God—I denied this vehemently in my days as a Progressive Covenantalist. However, I couldn’t show how this theology avoids this logical conclusion when pressed by my Presbyterian pastor. In my zeal to project the New Covenant as being wholly effectual for salvation, I excluded children from the covenantal promises they are provided, particularly baptism. This is a huge tenet of Progressive Covenantalism- the Old Testament church (or rather ethnic Israel) consisted of believers and their children, while the New Testament church excludes children.5
However, this does not hold up under the scrutiny of a framework that looks at scripture as one unified book. Are we to believe that the children within the promise of the old covenant on the Day of Pentecost were covenantally joined at 8:59AM that morning, but a mere two minutes later at 9:01AM they were thrown outside the covenant? Why is the language of the New Covenant in scripture pointing to a more inclusive Covenant, and yet children are cast aside?
Progressive Covenantalism will state that the New Covenant is a Better Covenant because it has better promises (i.e. the Covenant is sufficient salvifically) but how can that hold up to scrutiny when we see that many are warned about breaking the New Covenant?
Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The LORD will judge His people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. - Hebrews 10:29-31
Here we see: Some of those sanctified by the BLOOD OF THE covenant will apostatize & the Lord will judge His people regarding wrath & judgement. Under Progressive Covenantalism, these passages are either supposing Christ is sanctified by the blood of the covenant or is a hypothetical threat, as apostates cannot be sanctified.
This does not hold up to context however, only in Covenant Theology can you understand that covenant breakers are in the New Covenant but are not part of the Elect. Even though Progressive Covenantalism attempts to state that the New Covenant community is wholly sanctified there’s no way to get around the passages in Hebrews 6 & 10 or ignore Paul’s warnings of various apostates throughout his epistles.
Progressive Covenantalism pits the Mosaic Covenant against the New Covenant, adherents like John Reisinger have stated that there is no Grace at Sinai. However, this isn’t the case and the clearest way to see that is to see God giving grace in that Old Covenant. Many Christians will look at the book of Leviticus and assume that the entire book is “Law” – “If a man keeps God’s statutes and judgments, he shall live by them”6 but the truth contained in this book has grace. Let’s look at Leviticus 26:40-45 (NKJV):
'[But] if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, and that they also have walked contrary to Me, and [that] I also have walked contrary to them and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if their uncircumcised hearts are humbled, and they accept their guilt-- then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and My covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham I will remember; I will remember the land. The land also shall be left empty by them, and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them; they will accept their guilt, because they despised My judgments and because their soul abhorred My statutes. Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, nor shall I abhor them, to utterly destroy them and break My covenant with them; for I [am] the LORD their God. But for their sake I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I [am] the LORD.' "
Here we see that even as God rightfully judges Israel for covenant-breaking, He promises them restoration upon repentance. This isn’t based on them following the Mosaic Covenant, but it’s based on His faithfulness. Yes, there are real life ramifications for being unfaithful, but thank God that His promises are rooted in His faithfulness and not our own righteousness. This should give us hope within the Church today as well. Those covenant-breakers referred to in Hebrews 10, if they repent, are restored. Here we see a beautiful unity through scripture, as opposed to a “mix of unity and disunity”7 God provides grace time and time again. We could spend hours on the above passage or on the following:
- Exodus 20:2 shows that even as God provides the Moral Law to His people, He prefaces it by His gracious act of delivering them from slavery. We understand that the law is a response to redemption, not a means of earning it.
- Numbers 14:18-20 shows us that as Moses intercedes for Israel, not because of anything they did to deserve that, but because of the love from God’s grace. Israel had rebelled and yet they are pardoned just as we are by taking Christ’s righteousness.
- Deuteronomy 9:4-6 vigorously denies any notion of merit for Israel- God gives them the land promised to Abraham purely as an act of grace because He is faithful. He will deliver on His promises, even as we fall short daily.
These are just a few spots from the scriptures involving the Mosaic Covenant where God’s grace is on full display. This shows the continual thread from Genesis 3:15 to Revelation 22:21 of God saving sinners through his Son Jesus Christ. When the New Covenant is mentioned as a better covenant in Hebrews 8 this does not divorce it from how grace was applied in the times of Moses, but in showing how the ceremonial sacraments of the patriarchs have been replaced, and the offer of grace through the New Covenant becoming more inclusive. Despite all the claims of Progressive Covenantalism that it adheres to a biblical theology foundation without imposing a framework upon the text of scripture it applies a framework of disunity between the Old & New testaments consistent with dispensationalism to juxtapose the New Covenant against Moses.
Covenant Theology on the other hand understands that the Mosaic Covenant at Sinai provides grace to the congregation in the wilderness. God has not given us a book of disunity, but of unity. God has provided one plan of salvation to His one people. The same grace that saved Abraham from Ur, Israel from Egypt, and David from Saul is the same grace that God uses for the church today. God is a God who gives grace to wretched sinners since Adam & Eve, and for that we can be thankful.
To assist readers unaware of the distinctions between Dispenationalism, Covenant Theology, & Progressive Covenantalism the below chart can be used as a guide:
| Covenant Theology | Dispensationalism | Progressive Covenantalism |
|---|---|---|
| The Church began in the Old testament | The Church began at Pentecost | The Church began at Pentecost |
| Adam was under a Covenant of Works in Gen 2 | There is no Covenant of Works | There is no Covenant of Works |
| Adam was provided a Covenant of Grace in Gen 3 | There is no Covenant of Grace | There is no Covenant of Grace |
| God’s method in history is through related covenants over arching history | God’s method in history is through separate dispensations in time | God’s method in history is through distinct covenants in time |
| Understands a genre-based hermeneutic | Stresses a literal, grammatical, historical hermeneutic | Understands a genre-based hermeneutic that leans literal. |
| The Moral Law is still in effect from Sinai | OT Laws are no longer in effect | The Law of Christ is better than Sinai’s and in effect |
| Israel can mean descendents of Jacob or the Church | Israel always means literal descendents of Jacob | Israel can mean descendents of Jacob or the Church |
| The NT Church is the culmination of God’s people | The NT Church is a parenthesis moment in time | The NT Church is the culmination of God’s people |
| The Church is the Kingdom of God | A Future Milennium is the Kingdom of God | The Church is the Kingdom of God |
| OT believers were in Christ | OT believers were not in Christ | OT believers are now in Christ |
| Does not believe in a pre-tribulational rapture | Believes in a Pre-tribulational Rapture | Does not believe in a pre-tribulational rapture |
- While I realize that there are distinctions both between and within Progressive Covenantalism & New Covenant Theology, particularly today; this article refers to the general school and distinctions of this framework as:
a. The Bible being Christotelic in it’s story.
b. Letting Biblical Theology inform Systematic Theology.
c. The Old Testament should be interpreted in light of the New Testament
d. The Old Covenant was temporary by design.
e. There is no Tripartite Division of the Law
f. The Church is under the Law of Christ, not Moses.
g. All members in the New Covenant community have the Holy Spirit. ↩︎ - John Reisinger, Abraham’s Four Seeds, (New Covenant Media, 1998),4 ↩︎
- A Blake White, A Short Primer on New Covenant Theology Essentials (Cross to Crown), 3 ↩︎
- Brian Rosner, Paul and the Law (InterVarsity Press, 2013), 209-216 ↩︎
- A Blake White, A Short Primer on New Covenant Theology Essentials, (Cross to Crown), 3 ↩︎
- Leviticus 18:5, author’s translation ↩︎
- A Blake White, A Short Primer on New Covenant Theology Essentials, (Cross to Crown) 1 ↩︎
Leave a comment