In today’s episode we have a special guest discussing a whopper of a topic: Covenant Theology. Be sure to check out Brad’s work over at theologynights.com. You can also find him on facebook, instagram, and youtube.

Note: Within the episode we misspoke regarding the 1689 and the Covenant of Grace in a way that could be misunderstood. Traditionally the 1689 Position holds that the Covenant of Grace is revealed in the Old Testament and inaugurated in the New Testament with Christ. In the episode we mention the Covenant of Grace beginning with Abraham in the 1689 position – and while this has been articulated by some in the 1689 camp, it is not the primary terminology (revealing being the primary terminology). To read the 1689 in full go here: https://founders.org/library/1689-confession/chapter-7-gods-covenant/

Subscribe: Itunes | Google | Spotify| Soundcloud| IHeart Radio| RSS Feed

Become a Patron!

“Behold Our God” Words and Music by Jonathan Baird, Meghan Baird, Ryan Baird, and Stephen Altrogge. © 2011 Sovereign Grace Praise (BMI). All rights reserved. Used by permission. www.SovereignGraceMusic.org

Categories:

Tags:

2 Responses

  1. Hate to say it but I couldn’t listen to the whole thing. I was hoping for a clear general explanation of each view point, but upon you guys thinking 1689 federalism believed the covenant of grace started at Abraham I realized it wouldn’t be much help. Your charts are more helpful than your discussion. I would warn against teaching or discussing theological views you have not sufficiently researched or you will lead people into error. For those wondering the Baptist view point, derived from the 1689 London Baptist Confession, believes the covenant of grace is being progressively revealed throughout the OT covenants and is finalized or actualized in the new covenant. In that way the covenant of grace and the new covenant are the same thing. The New Testament with Jesus would therefore be the starting point of the covenant of grace.

    • I appreciate your comment, though, your approach was quite off-putting.

      I hear you, though, and my thoughts are this: First, I added a note into the description correcting where what we said could have been misinterpreted. Second, after being in 1689 circles and holding to the confession (ex; my statement of faith on the website) for quite sometime, I have heard it articulated a number of ways and at the time I used the terminology I had been most used to. I realize now that it could be misleading, and so I appreciate you pointing that out and I have noted it in the description accordingly.

      That all said – there’s no reason to be graceless on a topic that isn’t as descriptively monolithic as individuals insist or like (or graceless at all). Reality is, if we were mistaken (though we simply used a different articulation), it simply happens. If everyone who made a mistake stopped teaching, well, there would be no teachers, right? We’re all learning and growing.

      As Augustine comments, “Use your knowledge as a sort of tool to build the edifice of charity, which remains forever, even when “knowledge passes away.” For knowledge which is used to promote love is useful, but in itself and separated from love it turns out to be not only useless but even harmful.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: