@GratefulDisciple That PDF looks like a good summary from what I know of it. I hadn't heard the criticism on page 161, but that's quite serious. I'm firmly on the side of progressive revelation and christological reading of the old. I don't think the NT should speak first as they say. I'd also say the idea of visible and invisible church is essential, you simply must assume that not all members of your church are truly saved in order to have a healthy church.
A short summary of my position is that the Biblical covenants are fundamental to understanding how the Bible works, but the Covenant of Grace is unbiblical and misleading. The idea of a promise is not a promise, you actually have to say it to the person you're promising it to. The CoG is bad theology because it exists outside of time, is between God and an amorphous "people of God", and the terms of the covenant are overly vague. It also doesn't really seem to have much explanatory benefit.
All the benefit of the CoG that I've ever heard taught can just as easily be taught by saying that God's modus operandi is grace. But the cynic in me thinks people don't want to reconsider it because it's the foundation of Reformed paedobaptism.
@curiousdannii Thank you for your feedback. Having a critique in mind while reading Horton (dialectical tension, to be fancy) keeps one sharper. Personally, I don't have much vested interest in a system other than one that is legitimate and practical enough for me. I was a beneficiary of paedobaptism but my wife is not Reformed so I was baptized again, which I consider as heavenly insurance :-). Even the Catholic church also recognizes my paedo / adult baptism (they care only the formula).
@curiousdannii Which OT commandments to obey is more serious though. I'm astonished how there seems to be no clear cut teaching of the nature of fulfillment / relevancy of the OT commandments, not only Mosaic but Adamic too (the ones that Mosaic took for granted). The natural law Thomistic system is very appealing to me but may not be that biblical. So I'm not that sure now, thus I'm investigating all presuppositions of each system, like reading the source code of a software.
@GratefulDisciple Examining the presuppositions is a great goal! But it's tricky because eventually you get to the level of theology that can't be proven and you just have to decide which system's picture of God you think is truest
@curiousdannii elections have consequences! Are you going to write up a meta-post explaining why people can't ask Cassette Tape questions so we can link for future reference?
@PeterTurner Oh, I hadn't thought of doing that. Maybe. I hope that by purging them our site will stop appearing in Google when people search for Christian cassettes. Though I'm really just assuming that's how people find this site...
@curiousdannii Yes, at that level, we will see more unproven elements. But to put it more positively, it lays bare the blueprint / schema / personal presuppositions that we bring in, so as a "buyer" of a system we know what we're getting into. Lonergan's method works great as a discovery tool. After all that, I think I can still recite the Nicene creed with full conviction, and that is still a LOT. I just don't know yet which covenant scheme, ecclesiology, theory of atonement, theology of grace, etc.
@GratefulDisciple The laws Christians keep are the ones they like; the ones they discard are the ones they dislike. (At least, that's all the rhyme or reason I've ever seen in the supposed moral/ceremonial law distinction. I don't doubt that there are some groups who actually think about this a bit more.)
@curiousdannii I read that twice and still don't get it, but I was kind of skim reading because I don't have much time right now. I'd like to come back to it.
@TRiG Yup, I am still struggling to find the rhyme / reason that I can accept, part of my investigation of the presuppositions of major Christian traditions. I'm very interested in how the Pharisaic tradition shaped Paul's understanding of old vs. new. To this end I find Chap 1 of this book extremely useful and insightful. It's also a major research focus such as the "New Perspective on Paul" movement in the academia.
@TRiG I see in your profile "I am more interested by the cultural context and the way people approach their beliefs than I am in the actual theology" and I'm similar, which makes me flexible in which theology to adopt. But I still believe in the Nicene creed (which makes me a mainstream Christian). If you care to share, what element of Christianity (in the broadest definition), or its presupposition, that you object to?
@curiousdannii I came across YET another covenant system by Gentry & Wellum which they called "progressive covenantalism" which they (also?) positioned between CT and DT. In their publisher's website they introduced the 2nd edition of their book, 2018 to address misunderstanding of their 1st edition (2012). Are you familiar with their work and if so, how is it different than Wells & Zaspel's NCT?
@curiousdannii Here's an essay by Stephen Wellum himself, describing how his "progressive covenantalism" is different than NCT, CT, and DT, giving me a good primer on those 4. I just hope there is no more systems to review within the evangelical community :-).
@curiousdannii After reading the essay, the position quite resonates with me, especially this statement: "First, the creation covenant is foundational for all future covenants since all subsequent covenants unpack Adam’s role in the world." Personally I'd like to Jesus's work as mainly defeating Satan and removing Adam's curse, so we believers obtain blessings from the pre-fall state enabling us to live in the Edenic state that Adam used to enjoy.
@curiousdannii I prefer to see the already but not yet epoch as believers striving to grow virtues assisted by God's grace (à la Aquinas) obeying Christ's law (congruent with our conscience's obeying natural law implanted since Adam) while fighting Satan until 2nd coming. I feel this way, everything fits together.
I probably should have asked this a few weeks ago, but didn't think about it. Can Jehovah's Witnesses run for moderator on secular websites (like this one) or is that something their religion prohibits them from doing?
@GratefulDisciple Oh, I have heard of PC, but had forgotten about it. I even have that book (2015 edition), but haven't read it yet. But if it has a creation covenant then they'd have to do exceptional work to convince me.
I probably should have asked this a few weeks ago, but didn't think about it. Can Jehovah's Witnesses run for moderator on secular websites (like this one) or is that something their religion prohibits them from doing?
The Upper Room
The Upper Room