Covenantalism under the Microscope - Part 2

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=100 BGCOLOR="#CCCCFF" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="0c900640egdysm.jpg"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#000066" FACE="Arial" ><B>Grace Bible Fellowship</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#000099" FACE="Arial" ><B> </B></FONT><B>    |     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Grace Bible Fellowship"><B>home</B></A><B><IMG SRC="0e7523c0.png" border=0 width="82" height="60" ALIGN="LEFT" HSPACE="10" VSPACE="0"></B></div> <div> back to<B>  </B><A HREF="id76.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Covenantalism Under the Microscope"><B>Covenantalism Under the Microscope</B></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=200 BGCOLOR="#0000BF" TEXT="#F7F7FF"> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id80.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Covenantalism Under the Microscope Part">Covenantalism Under the Microscope - Part 1</A></div> <div> <B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffcccc00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Covenantalism under the Microscope - Part 2</B></div> <div> <A HREF="id81.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Covenantalism under the Microscope Part">Covenantalism under the Microscope - Part 3</A></div> <div> <A HREF="id88.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Covenantalism Under the Microscope Part">Covenantalism Under the Microscope - Part 4 </A></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=380 width="100%" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>Covenantalism under the Microscope - Part 2</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The Abrahamic Covenant, Gentile laws, and the Book of Acts</B></div> <bR> <div> Abstract: <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >Covenantalism is a prominent theological system that is founded on a false theological presupposition. As is usual of false systems, covenantalism manufactures a “universal principle” based on a limited consideration of only a portion of Scripture, and then interprets Scripture in light of that principle – often ignoring vast portions of Scripture that expose their error. In some regards, this tendency is akin to the way Arminians defend their false view of salvation and import their false presupposition of free will into key texts. Major features of covenantalism are falsely deduced from an assumed hypothesis of the universality of rituals as “signs and seals.” Oddly, the evolution of such signs and seals actually shows more affinity to some brands of dispensationalism, i.e. as an evolving system of varying temporary signs and seals that give way in time to newer signs and seals of (hypothetical) “salvation” for the partakers thereof. One particular aspect of this is how the literal Israel is really not elect but a reprobate that metamorphoses into the Body of Christ, and then Scriptures pertaining to Israel are distorted to apply to the Body (“spiritual” Israel). This is a feature not unlike Scoffield dispensationalism’s “period of testing/failure” or the Arminian Plan-A, Plan-B approach to prophecy, or even worse that the meaning of Scripture has changed over time.</FONT></div> <bR> <div> In this study we will examine the Abrahamic covenant. Particularly, we will see that key aspects of the Abrahamic covenant are distorted or ignored to support the covenantalist system. Key in this matter is the issue of Abraham’s hope. Are the elect “monolithic”? Is there just one homogeneous “people of God” who will reside in heaven forever? Or does the Abrahamic covenant establish the land of Canaan as the eternal abode of the saved circumcision? In other studies, the role of circumcision within the Abrahamic covenant will be examined and we will see that its role is not what the covenantalists claim.</div> <bR> <div> Proof texts using the Abrahamic covenant show that the covenantalists fail even within their own system by not grasping the meaning of the Abrahamic covenant. They then misappropriate wholesale  texts of Paul to bolster their false Body-dividing system. It is in this framework that they construct their erroneous interpretation of baptism as a “sign and seal” that replaces circumcision, and that is then extended to children based on a presumed analogy with circumcision.</div> <bR> <div> <B>NOTE</B>: All quotes from Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith, are copyright (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.</div> <bR> <div> I.    Outline</div> <div> A.   Review of Abrahamic Covenant</div> <div> B.   The Gentilic laws</div> <div> C.   Relation of Abrahamic Covenant and Gentile laws</div> <div> D.   Covenantalist views on nature of covenants</div> <bR> <div> II.   Review</div> <bR> <div> A.  We will address the following areas of errors in Covenantalism during this series:</div> <div> 1.   Hermeneutical/exegetical errors</div> <div> 2.   Eschatological errors</div> <div> 3.   Ecclessiological errors</div> <div> a.        Priesthood</div> <div> b.        Ceremonial sacramentalism</div> <div> c.        Sectarian division of the One Body</div> <bR> <div>  B. In prior study: WCF on the eternal state</div> <div> 1.   WCF Chapter 32, Of the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead: Section 1. ... the souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God, in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies. (Heb. 12:23, 2 Cor. 5:1,6,8, Phil. 1:23, Acts 3:21, Eph. 4:10) ...</div> <div>                          </div> <div> 2.   Presbyterian interpretation in Larger Catechism, Question 90: What shall be done to the righteous at the day of judgment? Answer: At the day of judgment, the righteous, being caught up to Christ in the clouds, (1 Thess. 4:17) shall be set on his right hand, and there openly acknowledged and acquitted, (Matt. 25:33, Matt. 10:32) shall join with him in the judging of reprobate angels and men, (1 Cor. 6:2–3) and shall be received into heaven, (Matt. 25:34,46) where they shall be fully and for ever freed from all sin and misery; (Eph. 5:27, Rev. 14:13) filled with inconceivable joys, (Ps. 16:11) made perfectly holy and happy both in body and soul, in the company of innumerable saints and holy angels, (Heb. 12:22–23) but especially in the immediate vision and fruition of God the Father, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, to all eternity. (1 John 3:2, 1 Cor. 13:12, 1 Thess. 4:17–18) And this is the perfect and full communion, which the members of the invisible church shall enjoy with Christ in glory, at the resurrection and day of judgment.</div> <bR> <div> 3.   Comments</div> <div> a.   Note: All of the saved reside in the same place, eternally in heaven.</div> <div> b.   There is just a single day of “judgment” for all of mankind. There is just one resurrection of all mankind (the “general resurrection”).</div> <div> c.   In prior studies we have shown that all of the redeemed do not reside eternally in heaven, and that there is more than one resurrection and judgment.</div> <bR> <div>  4.  Establishment of the Abrahamic Covenant</div> <div> a.   Verses: Gen. 12:1-3, 6-7; 13:14-17;15:1-21;17:1-14;22:15-18.</div> <div> b.   God made many promises in the covenant to Abraham.</div> <div> (1) Abraham’s name shall be great.</div> <div> (2) That a great nation should come from him.</div> <div> (3) He should be a blessing so great that in him all of the nations of the earth should be blessed.</div> <div> (4) To Abraham <B>personally</B> (“to thee”) and to his seed should be given the land of Palestine forever to inherit (“an everlasting possession).</div> <div> (5) The multitude of his seed should be as the dust of the earth.</div> <div> (6) That whosoever blessed him should be blessed and whosoever cursed him should be cursed.</div> <div> (7)  He would be the Father of many nations.</div> <div> (8)  Kings should proceed from him.</div> <div> (9)  The covenant shall be an everlasting covenant.</div> <div> (10) The Lord will be a God to him and to his seed.</div> <div> (11) His seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.</div> <div> c.   We comment on 4.b.(4) above. Recall Rom. 15:8. Christ was a minister to the circumcision. Note that “promises” is plural and the verse refers to the Fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). We saw last time that God promised the land to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob personally. Also Rom. 11:29.</div> <div> (1) Question: Which promises are these? Answer: The ones recorded in Scripture.</div> <div> (a) Particularly Gen. 13:14-17 which is a key passage, we comment in detail.</div> <div> (b) The Lord promises that Abraham will personally (Gen. 13:15,17) inherit the land he saw (Gen. 13:14,15) and walked on (Gen. 13:17). And that Abraham will inherit it forever.</div> <div> (c) This is an account of an historical event. It is not poetic language that the covenantalists like to invoke so it can’t be “spritualized” (e.g. “land” means “heaven”) without destroying the history and the correspondence of the empirical content of what Abraham saw and experienced with the meaning of the words.</div> <div> (d) These are some of the terms of a covenant – to take a position that the terms of a covenant are crouched in mystical language is contrary to the very nature of a covenant! (In that warped view a covenant is like a contract with small print except the small print is not provided – what ought the party to the covenant understand the words to mean? )</div> <div> (e) If God directs Abraham’s attention to the land and knowingly has something else in mind, then God is a deceiver. He knows His utterance will never be true. That means God would not have the attribute of truthfulness.                                   </div> <div> (f)  Another covenantalist attempt is that the promise of the land was conditional. This is not true, there were no conditions when the promises were made. If one wants to say there was a condition for Abram to move to Canaan, then we note that Abraham did move. Thus the condition was satisfied. Note too that Christ confirmed the promise during his earthly ministry when the Fathers were long since dead and incapable of personally performing any conditions. Since Christ confirmed the promises any hypothetical conditions the covenantalists would like to invoke must have been fulfilled during the lives of the Fathers.</div> <div> (g) It should be conclusive that Abraham personally will reside eternally on earth.</div> <bR> <div> (2) Note the wording in Exo. 6:4. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never possessed the land! (See also Acts:72-5; Hebrews 11:13-16). They were strangers and sojourners in the land. The fact that the Fathers never possessed the land is proof of their resurrections. For God is faithful and will fulfill literally what he promised.</div> <div> (3) Some examples of Christ confirming the promises:</div> <div> (a) The literal promises as proof of the resurrection: Matt. 22:23-34.</div> <div> (b) The inheritance is the earth and it is eternal: Matt 5:5; Psalm 37:9, 11, 18, 22, 28, 29.</div> <div> (c) The distinction of the circumcision and the uncircumcision: Matt. 15:28 (Canaanite woman). </div> <bR> <div> 5.   A key point of all dispensationalists is that the Abrahamic covenant proves the eternal nature of the nation of Israel. Acts 2 types who place Peter in the Body of Christ have committed the same error as covenantalists. Personal promises were made to Peter as a righteous Jew, all according to the promises of the Abrahamic and New Covenant (made with Israel). If the terms of the Abrahamic can be mutated with regard to Peter, then why can’t they be mutated with respect to Abraham also? This is another example of a man-made theological error. It destroys the whole basis of Acts 2 dispensationalism, which self-destructs when examined from Scripture and from an internal critique.</div> <bR> <div> III.   Gentilic laws and covenants</div> <div> A.  Made with the Gentiles (the uncircumcision). Pre-Abraham, the circumcision not in view</div> <div> B.  With Adam, Gen. 1:28,29</div> <div> 1.   Command to fill the earth.</div> <div> 2.   Dominion over earth and animals</div> <div> 3.   Food/dietary law: only plant life is given for food.</div> <bR> <div> C.  With Noah, Gen. 9:1-17.</div> <div> 1.   Command to fill the earth repeated 9:1,7 (parallel to Gen. 1:28)</div> <div> 2.   Modification of dietary law in Gen. 9:3 (parallel to Gen. 1:29).</div> <div> a.  Animal flesh no longer prohibited</div> <div> b.  However, the meat must be “kosher,” that is, slaughtered by bleeding to death.</div> <div> 3.   Institution of death penaly for murder Gen. 9:5-6.</div> <div> 4.   Rainbow as sign of covenant that earth would not be destroyed by water again.</div> <bR> <div> IV.  Relation of Abrahamic covenant with Gentiles</div> <div> A.  Abrahamic covenant made with Abraham and a chosen line of his descendents to be the preistly nation governing the gentiles (nations).</div> <div> B.  Abrahamic covenant did not overturn Gentilic laws – these still in force for Gentiles</div> <bR> <div> C.  NOTE: The Abrahamic covenant did not establish a "new condition for salvation," i.e. that Jews were saved and Gentiles lost. That is the notion the Pharisees entertained. The analogy between the circumcision/uncircumcision is not between saved/unsaved – the circumcision/uncircumcision distinction is administrative not salvific. The Abrahamic covenant established a chosen people as the distinctive people of God to be God’s channel of blessing (grace). Thus they were a nation of priests.</div> <bR> <div> D.  The Covenantalist don’t understand the Abrahamic covenant and its relation to the Gentiles. It is no wonder then that they can invent a false system of signs and seals.  Further, the Abrahamic covenant is distinct from the old covenant, a point that is missed in the "two covenant" ("old/new") emphasis of  covenantalism.</div> <bR> <div> E.  When they have no Scripture they have to wave their hands and appeal to their false anaolgy of water baptism to circumcision – an anaolgy refuted by events in the book of Acts (examined below). </div> <bR> <div> F.   Before water baptism was introduced what was the sign and seal for righteous gentiles? Surely they were under the covenant of grace. What was their sign and seal of admission into the “visible church”?</div> <bR> <div> V.   Signs and seals. Sacramentalism</div> <div> A.  Covenantalism is a sacerdotalist system. Point: Sacramentalism and sacerdotalism go hand-in-hand.</div> <div> B.  The Priesthood of Covenantalism.</div> <div> 1.   Need to be careful in terms. Today when one says “priest” the typical idea of a priest is that of a Roman Catholic priest. When one speaks of a RC priest that is not what the Scriptures mean. The functions/powers of a R.C. priest are not in the Bible – an example being the conveyance of salvific powers. The Protestants correctly rejected that heresy. Nonetheless, what remains in the role of the Presbyterian minister as stated in the WCF is a priestly function.</div> <div> 2.   Biblical idea of a priest. Many texts in our other outlines. The main idea is one who mediates or acts as a channel of blessing before God on behalf of another party who is not permitted. Examples:</div> <div> a.   The angels are priestly mediators to Israel.</div> <div> b.   The Levitical priesthood are the exclusive meditors for the nation of Israel as a whole. The functions included administrating the ordinances, sacrifices, temple service etc. (The WCF refers to these as the OT sacraments).</div> <div> c.   Israel collectively is a nation of priests (mediators) to the Gentiles.</div> <div> d.   Examination of Biblical texts of the above relations will provide a complete view of the God given role/functions of priests.</div> <div> e.   WCF on sacraments:</div> <div> (1) “Chap. XXVII. - Of the Sacraments *** 1.      Sacraments are holy signs and seals of the covenant of grace, (Rom. 4:11, Gen. 17:7,10) immediately instituted by God, (Matt. 28:19, 1 Cor. 11:23) to represent Christ and His benefits; and to confirm our interest in Him: (1 Cor. 10:16, 1 Cor. 11:25–26, Gal. 3:27, Gal. 3:17) as also, to put a visible difference between those that belong unto the Church and the rest of the world; (Rom. 15:8, Exod. 12:48, Gen. 34:14) and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to His Word. (Rom. 6:3–4, 1 Cor. 10:16,21)”.</div> <bR> <div> (2) Chap. XXVIII. - Of Baptism. 1. Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, (Matt. 28:19) not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; (1 Cor. 12:13) but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, (Rom. 4:11, Col. 2:11–12) of his ingrafting into Christ, (Gal. 3:27, Rom. 6:5) of regeneration, (Tit. 3:5) of remission of sins, (Mark 1:4) and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life. (Rom. 6:3–4) Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world. (Matt. 28:19–20) ***</div> <bR> <div> 3.   Conclusion: WCF proclaims an exclusive channel of blessing through the Presbyterian minister as the adminsitrator of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s supper. <B>That makes him a priest in precisely the same way as the Levitical preisthood</B>. The WCF actually admits this in a round about way:    “Chap. XXVII. - Of the Sacraments *** 5.The sacraments of the old testament in regard of the spiritual things thereby signified and exhibited, were, for substance, the same with those of the new. (1 Cor. 10:1–4)”</div> <bR> <div> 4.   The WCF on the functions of the minister</div> <div> a.   <B>Exclusive</B> dispenser of the sacraments:</div> <div> (1)  “Chap. XXVII. - Of the Sacraments *** 4.      There be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord: <I><B>neither of which may be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained</B></I>. (Matt. 28:9, 1 Cor. 11:20,23, 1 Cor. 4:1, Heb. 5:4)” (emph. added)</div> <div> (2)  “CHAP. XXVIII. - Of Baptism *** 2.    The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto. (Matt. 3:11, John 1:33, Matt. 28:19–20)</div> <div> b.   The sacraments are a channel of blessing/means of grace:</div> <div> (1) “Chap. XXVII. - Of the Sacraments *** 3.      The grace which is exhibited in or by the sacraments rightly used, is not conferred by any power in them; neither doth the efficacy of a sacrament depend upon the piety or intention of him that doth administer it: (Rom. 2:28–29, 1 Pet. 3:21) but upon the work of the Spirit, (Matt. 3:11, 1 Cor. 12:13) and the word of institution, which contains, together with a precept authorizing the use thereof, <I><B>a promise of benefit</B></I> to worthy receivers. (Matt. 26:27–28, Matt. 28:19–20)” (emph. added)</div> <div> (2) “Chap. XXIX. - Of the Lord’s Supper *** 7.  Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, (1 Cor. 11:28) do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive, and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses. (1 Cor. 10:16)</div> <div> (3) “CHAP. XXVIII. - Of Baptism *** 6.   The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; (John 3:5,8) yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, <B>the grace promised</B> is not only offered, but really exhibited, <B>and conferred, by the Holy Ghost</B>, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in His appointed time. (Gal. 3:27, Tit. 3:5, Eph. 5:25–26, Acts 2:38,41)”</div> <bR> <div> c.   <B>Thus the Presbyterian minister </B><B>is an exclusive mediator of grace</B>– <B>This violates 1 Tim. 2:4</B>. The fact that individuals can be saved without the baptism by a Presbyterian priest is not the point (cf. e.g. WCF XXVIII.5), the Presbyterian minister has the exclusive “keys to the kingdom” in the “sacraments.” They are the gate-keepers for the admission to their local assembly so that members can partake of the grace exhibited and conferred by the sacraments -- by their own doctrinal standards the minister is a channel for the action of the Holy Spirit's grace.</div> <bR> <div> 5.   Regarding functions of the eldership in the Body of Christ we have noted that Paul, in the pastoral epistles, gives no instructions on administering sacraments. The covenantalists can only appeal to texts for the other dispensations and arguing by analogy by selective proof texting. An analogy that is invalid as we have and will see.</div> <bR> <div> C.  Were James and Paul Presbyterians?</div> <div> 1.   The central presbyterian tenet of signs and seals: New covenant supercedes all covenants [as we remarked Covenant Theology has a myopic fixation on the old (Mosaic) and new covenants], and its sign and seal is baptism which replaces circumcision.</div> <div> 2.   Remember James and Paul are Apostles! Noahic laws reaffirmed for Gentiles in Acts 15 and in Acts 21. Circumcision (Abrahamic covenant) and sacrifices (Mosaic covenant) affirmed by James and Paul in Acts 21.</div> <div> 3.   Acts 15 – Noahic laws are confirmed for Gentiles. Note date of Acts 15 is approximately 51 A.D. That is 22 years after Christ’s ascension. Were Peter and James teaching error for those 22 years?</div> <div> 4.   Acts 21 – Contextual comment, Acts 21 occurs approximately in 58 A.D. This is 29 years after Christ’s ascension! Do we have seven more years of doctrinal error?</div> <div> 5.   Note that as of 58 A.D. the following Scriptures have already been written. (Note that the doctrine contained in the letters had already been taught and delivered orally for many years prior to the epistles):</div> <div> a.   James and Jude: 45 A.D.</div> <div> b.   1,2,3 John about 56 A.D.</div> <div> c.   Paul’s epistles</div> <div> (1) 1,2 Thessalonians: 53 AD</div> <div> (2) 1,2 Corinthians: 57 AD</div> <div> (3) Galatians, Romans: 58 AD (just prior to arriving at Jerusalem and the events of Acts 21).</div> <div> 6.   Note: If Galatians and Romans teach that water baptism replaces circumcision, then James was ignorant of this truth (the believing Jews still practiced circumcision and were also baptizing – two signs and seals?) And Paul is guilty of dissimulation just like Peter (who he had written that he had rebuked in Galatians – the ink has barely dried on the paper!)</div> <div> 7.   Are James and Paul still ignorant of Presbyterianism? Yes!</div> <bR> <div> D.  Some WCF Proof texts that water baptism is equivalent to circumcision</div> <div> 1.   Rom. 4:11</div> <div> a.   Note: water baptism is not even in the context!</div> <div> b.   The context is within the topic of faith and it relation to the circumcision and the uncircumcision. Paul’s point is not an argument for water or a ritual of any kind! It is an argument that faith is totally apart from ceremonies. Further the only ceremony under discussion is circumcision which marked the distinction between Jews and Gentiles (the dividing wall). And Paul’s point is that Abraham believed while yet uncircumcised! Afterwards he recieved the sign of circumcision that marks Jews apart from Gentiles. It is this that makes Abraham the father of all those who believe – whether circumcised or uncircumcised. Abram was a gentile “called-out” to a new hope of the circumcision. Incidentally note that since Abraham is the faher of all those who believe that includes Abel, for example. [See Rom. 4:21 also. Abraham believed in what God promised – each example is literal.]</div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>