The new covenant, like the old, is for Jews only. Please read Jeremiah 31 before you object. Thanks.

My recent comments pertain why antinomianism-by-any-other-name (referring to what you’ve identified as the confusion of the new heart with the law of Christ) exists; as I’ve advocated at lenght (not here / not recently until yesterday), NCT proponents’ unwillingness / inability to “deal” with Galatians 3:16 [and 29 (cf. Hebrews 9:15 - 17)] ultimately resulted in the pendulum-effect mysticism which your “post” and most comments thereto have challenged.

Amen!

As Kerry Kinchen said quite some time back “The law of Christ is supernomian.” Love is so much more difficult to accomplish than a Mosaic pragmatism. Living out this law takes a new heart. It has to be wrought by the work of the Holy Spirit.

Mike – so good to see you amongst us, brother. You’ve been sorely missed.

Blessings,

Dustin…

As woeful as is antinomianism-by-any-other-name, our Lord used the advocacy of such to result in Blake White writing the book. May the book effectuate a return of NCT to exegesis without agenda and Scripture-driven doctrine; who knows what impact such may have on system-driven theologies?

The root of NCT’s near-death is the fatal flaw of Covenant Theology and Dispensational theology: Refusal to reckon with Galatians 3:16 (and 29; cf. Hebrews 9:15 – 17). The promises were made to the covenantees — Abraham and Jesus; saving faith in Jesus results in inheriting through Him. Yes, He was given — as propitiation — as a result of love for the world (John 3:16) … meaning not love for only ethnic, national Israel (indeed, only the remnant therof are beneficiaries).

That said, the plan of redemption reveals not that Jesus was given to us, but, rather, that we — those who are called (Hebrews 9:15) are given to Him (that’s how we inherit what was promised to Him!). “He made the One who did not know sin to be sin for us so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21) –THAT has content and meaning; that is the reality … Isaiah (and Ezekiel; cf. Hebrews 10:16 – 18) merely pointed to the “picture”.

Again (see my previous comment): Theology which unduly focuses on the picture and, ocncomitantly ignores the NT revelation has dominated Christendom for centuries. NCT was a blessed exception; may it recognize its recent folly and resume propagation of Truth!

Just a point of clarification: I asked that my audio be removed from the NCBF site because it no longer accurately reflected me, not because it no longer reflected my hermeneutic. The emphasis of my ministry and teaching has changed to more of a gospel focus (1 Cor. 2:2), but NCT is probably the hermeneutic that I most closely align with, depending on who’s defining NCT. Most of my papers have been re-written and posted on my site. If you click on my name above, it should take you there. I’m hoping to get my In Defense of the New Covenant paper put into booklet form once I’ve finished with it.

Take care guys… Mike

“[The Law Of Christ: A Theological Proposal] strikes a powerful blow at the silly notion that you can separate true biblical holy living from correct biblical theology.”

~ John Reisinger, Foreword (p. 1) to The Law Of Christ:: A Theological Proposal.

I just received my copies of that book and of John Reisiger’s Studies in Galatians and am eager to read each. Aa much as I’d like to read JGR characterize the concept of “future Israel” a “silly notion”, I’m thankful that he “calls a spade a spade” wrt antinomianism-by-any-other-name.

As has all-too-frequently occurred during the past two millennia, the (at best) dangerous, mystical “silly notion” which is antinomianism-by-any-other-name has an ostensibe OT basis: The concept of Christ as Covenant (Isaiah 42:6, 49:8).

As has all-too-frequently occurred during the past four-and-a-half centuries, the OT “picture” — Christ as Covenant (in this case) — has received undue focus while, concomitantly, the indispensable NT revelation [via Hebrews 9:15 - 17 (cf. Galatians 3:16, 29*)] has been ignored.

* Jesus is the MEDIAtor of a new covenant SO that THOSE who are CALLED may INHERIT the PROMISES madt TO the Testator via the DEATH of the Testator and UPON the DEATH of the Testator.

Hi, Greg; the content of the book is not identical to the content of the monthly articles. Presumably, the content is quite similar. I just today received my copy (plus nine additional copies for a study group) of Studies in Glatians [along with Blake White's The Law of Christ: A Theological Proposal (about which I'm even more confident, now that I've perused it)].

JGR’s latest book looks to be excellent (as expected); that said, one who has already read it opined that the recent “no quarter” approach to Covenant Theology continues …. as does — alas — the reluctance to “slam the door” on Dispensational Theology. A quick check of comments pertaining to Galatians 3:16 and 3:29 confirms such.

JGR’s Foreword to The Law of Christ: A Theological Proposal is quite encouraging; may the Foreword and the book bring an end to the mysticism spawned by undue focus on the OT (Isaiah 42:6, 49:8) “picture” of Jesus as covenant and concomitant disregard of NT ( Hebrews 9:15 – 17 ) revelation that Jesus’ death (substitutionary atonement) is the means by which “those who are called” (those in the will) inherit the promises made to Him ( Galatians 3:16 , Galatians 3:29).

Hi Jim, can you please link me to the relevant page(s) in the monthly SoG? Thanks.