What do you think?
Rate this book
What Is NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY? An Introduction
New Covenant Theology is a developing system of theology that seeks to let the Bible inform our theology. This sounds basic, and almost all systems of theology claim that their system is based upon the Bible. As I hope to show you, New Covenant Theology is the system of theology that allows the Bible to have the "final say" most consistently. Whereas Dispensationalism stands on presuppositions provided by its beloved Scofield Bible and Covenant Theology stands on presuppositions provided by its cherished West-minster Confession, New Covenant Theology does not have any outside document that must be imposed on the text of Scripture. It strives to let the Sacred Text speak on its own terms.
74 pages, Paperback
First published April 6, 2012
19 people are currently reading
68 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
February 14, 2020
There's a few reasons why I rate it one star (not exhaustive, I'd have to write a book in response to it). Mind you, this is coming from someone who once ascribed to New Covenant Theology (NCT):
1) Paints Covenant Theology with a very broad brush, leaving Reformed Baptists out in the cold, and only considering Presbyterian Covenant Theology when dealing with Covenant Theology (CT).
2) Claims that NCT "does not have any outside document that must be imposed on the text of Scripture. It strives to let the sacred text speak on its own terms." However, the arguments for NCT are based on simple prooftexting, bringing the author's presuppositions to the surface. It is dishonest at best to speak of a system not having any presuppositions at all and be founded solely on Scripture. It is dangerous at worst. Everyone has presuppositions. If the author acknowledges this, he should have at least acknowledged that and more humbly summarize views contrary to NCT. White claims, "New Covenant Theology is the system of theology that is most consistent with the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura (Scripture alone)." But what I found in the pages of this book is solo, not sola scriptura. The author does not take Scripture in a harmonious fashion, but rather finds texts ripped from their context, reads its presupposition into them, and presents them as proving his case.
3) Much of the distinctives of NCT are things that no CTan would disagree with. I found myself scratching my head several times, waiting to see how these distinctives were in disagreement with CT.
4) Biblicism/literalism: "If the word isn't in Scripture, it's not Biblical" approach.
5) Creates a dichotomy between the God of the old covenant and that of the new covenant, and a dichotomy between the intent of the Old Covenant (OC) law and that of the New Covenant (NC). Were Israelites allowed to hate their brother as long as they didn't kill them? Were they allowed to look at their neighbor's wife or property with lust and covetousness as long as they didn't actually commit adultery or theft? That is the question that rises from seeing Jesus as abolishing the law and giving a new one on the Sermon on the Mount. These are questions that go unanswered.
6) Assumes that the laws in the 10 commandments start and end with Moses: was it wrong to murder and steal before God wrote the commandments on the tablets of stone with his own finger? Clearly not. Are NC Christians subject to dietary laws? Clearly not. Therefore, there is a natural distinction in the law of God by virtue of that alone. There is a moral law that has applied at all times, to all people anywhere and everywhere. Not everything has to be spelled out literally in the Bible to be true.
7) The explanation of what is the law (or pattern, as the author calls it) of Christ leaves the reader wondering: Is love of God and neighbor a thing exclusive to the NC?
8) Does not take into account the wide semantic range of words: Concepts like "covenant, law, age, Sabbath" are simplified to such a degree that no nuance is allowed. If I see a text that says "the law is done away with," the author's' conclusion would be to read its position into the text: "See? It says law, and law means Mosaic law, and the Mosaic law and its covenant is a whole. Therefore, this verse clearly teaches that the Ten Commandments are also gone." This is not exegesis or critical thinking.
9) Uses terms that show the law in a "negative" light to argue for its temporary nature and passing away: The problem with this is that the author fails to mention in what context the Biblical author is speaking of the law. Is it in its salvific sense? Well, then it makes sense to speak of the law in a "negative" light because the law was never intended to save anyone, both in the OC and the NC. Where is the citation of Romans 7 where the law is spoken of in a "positive" way in the sense that it shows us our sin and thus our need of Christ? It is a very one-sided approach. The various verses listed often refer to things that any Christian would agree with, and thus make the point moot.
10) Galatians 6:2 - another example of biblicism and eisegesis. "See? It says 'of Christ,' therefore it must mean a law completely different and new from the Mosaic law!" Is Christ not the same God of the OC? Is He not whose finger wrote the Ten Commandments into stone? Why would the Triune God be at odds with Himself?
11) The literalism ends when convenient: the author makes use of the different uses of the word "law," when he had previously advanced a methodology that would preclude such nuanced interpretation.
12) The OC was all about law, the NC is all about love: Very simplistic and unfair conclusion. Was Israel not commanded to love their neighbors as themselves, seeing they were all children of Abraham? This "cruciform love...at the heart of new covenant ethics" falls short in that it seems to imply that those in the OC were under a law that did not at its very heart require this of them.
13) Marcion-like tendencies/Andy Stanley's "unhitching" from the Old Testament rhetoric: I find this quote troublesome, "The law of Christ can be defined as those prescriptive principles drawn from the example and teaching of Jesus and his apostles (the central demand being love), which are meant to be worked out in specific situations by the guiding influence and empowerment of the Holy Spirit." Consistent with the claim that the doing away of the OC includes the doing away of all OT ethics, this quote shows the doing away of the entire OT itself. Why do we need the OT if Christ is the substance and His law is the only law there is?
14) While the author expresses this is an in-house debate and speaks in irenic terms, he does make statements that give reason for pause, "Covenant Theology, on the other hand, can be described as being “law-centered.” They would have us go to Christ for justification (our right standing with God) and to the law for sanctification (our growth in Christian maturity)." While CT is "law-centered," "New Covenant Theology can be described as “Spirit-driven and Christ centered.” The basic imperative of the new covenant is “walk by the Spirit” (Gal 5:16)." So those who ascribe to CT are not "Spirit-driven and Christ centered." That is uncharitable, unfair and unfounded at best.
There is much more I could say, but these reasons will suffice for now. I do appreciate the copious amount of Scripture citations and the summary of orthodoxy that all Biblical Christians would agree with. But I find myself responding to the author's expectation that he hopes "this little book" has made the centrality of Christ clear in NCT by saying "No, it has not."
1) Paints Covenant Theology with a very broad brush, leaving Reformed Baptists out in the cold, and only considering Presbyterian Covenant Theology when dealing with Covenant Theology (CT).
2) Claims that NCT "does not have any outside document that must be imposed on the text of Scripture. It strives to let the sacred text speak on its own terms." However, the arguments for NCT are based on simple prooftexting, bringing the author's presuppositions to the surface. It is dishonest at best to speak of a system not having any presuppositions at all and be founded solely on Scripture. It is dangerous at worst. Everyone has presuppositions. If the author acknowledges this, he should have at least acknowledged that and more humbly summarize views contrary to NCT. White claims, "New Covenant Theology is the system of theology that is most consistent with the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura (Scripture alone)." But what I found in the pages of this book is solo, not sola scriptura. The author does not take Scripture in a harmonious fashion, but rather finds texts ripped from their context, reads its presupposition into them, and presents them as proving his case.
3) Much of the distinctives of NCT are things that no CTan would disagree with. I found myself scratching my head several times, waiting to see how these distinctives were in disagreement with CT.
4) Biblicism/literalism: "If the word isn't in Scripture, it's not Biblical" approach.
5) Creates a dichotomy between the God of the old covenant and that of the new covenant, and a dichotomy between the intent of the Old Covenant (OC) law and that of the New Covenant (NC). Were Israelites allowed to hate their brother as long as they didn't kill them? Were they allowed to look at their neighbor's wife or property with lust and covetousness as long as they didn't actually commit adultery or theft? That is the question that rises from seeing Jesus as abolishing the law and giving a new one on the Sermon on the Mount. These are questions that go unanswered.
6) Assumes that the laws in the 10 commandments start and end with Moses: was it wrong to murder and steal before God wrote the commandments on the tablets of stone with his own finger? Clearly not. Are NC Christians subject to dietary laws? Clearly not. Therefore, there is a natural distinction in the law of God by virtue of that alone. There is a moral law that has applied at all times, to all people anywhere and everywhere. Not everything has to be spelled out literally in the Bible to be true.
7) The explanation of what is the law (or pattern, as the author calls it) of Christ leaves the reader wondering: Is love of God and neighbor a thing exclusive to the NC?
8) Does not take into account the wide semantic range of words: Concepts like "covenant, law, age, Sabbath" are simplified to such a degree that no nuance is allowed. If I see a text that says "the law is done away with," the author's' conclusion would be to read its position into the text: "See? It says law, and law means Mosaic law, and the Mosaic law and its covenant is a whole. Therefore, this verse clearly teaches that the Ten Commandments are also gone." This is not exegesis or critical thinking.
9) Uses terms that show the law in a "negative" light to argue for its temporary nature and passing away: The problem with this is that the author fails to mention in what context the Biblical author is speaking of the law. Is it in its salvific sense? Well, then it makes sense to speak of the law in a "negative" light because the law was never intended to save anyone, both in the OC and the NC. Where is the citation of Romans 7 where the law is spoken of in a "positive" way in the sense that it shows us our sin and thus our need of Christ? It is a very one-sided approach. The various verses listed often refer to things that any Christian would agree with, and thus make the point moot.
10) Galatians 6:2 - another example of biblicism and eisegesis. "See? It says 'of Christ,' therefore it must mean a law completely different and new from the Mosaic law!" Is Christ not the same God of the OC? Is He not whose finger wrote the Ten Commandments into stone? Why would the Triune God be at odds with Himself?
11) The literalism ends when convenient: the author makes use of the different uses of the word "law," when he had previously advanced a methodology that would preclude such nuanced interpretation.
12) The OC was all about law, the NC is all about love: Very simplistic and unfair conclusion. Was Israel not commanded to love their neighbors as themselves, seeing they were all children of Abraham? This "cruciform love...at the heart of new covenant ethics" falls short in that it seems to imply that those in the OC were under a law that did not at its very heart require this of them.
13) Marcion-like tendencies/Andy Stanley's "unhitching" from the Old Testament rhetoric: I find this quote troublesome, "The law of Christ can be defined as those prescriptive principles drawn from the example and teaching of Jesus and his apostles (the central demand being love), which are meant to be worked out in specific situations by the guiding influence and empowerment of the Holy Spirit." Consistent with the claim that the doing away of the OC includes the doing away of all OT ethics, this quote shows the doing away of the entire OT itself. Why do we need the OT if Christ is the substance and His law is the only law there is?
14) While the author expresses this is an in-house debate and speaks in irenic terms, he does make statements that give reason for pause, "Covenant Theology, on the other hand, can be described as being “law-centered.” They would have us go to Christ for justification (our right standing with God) and to the law for sanctification (our growth in Christian maturity)." While CT is "law-centered," "New Covenant Theology can be described as “Spirit-driven and Christ centered.” The basic imperative of the new covenant is “walk by the Spirit” (Gal 5:16)." So those who ascribe to CT are not "Spirit-driven and Christ centered." That is uncharitable, unfair and unfounded at best.
There is much more I could say, but these reasons will suffice for now. I do appreciate the copious amount of Scripture citations and the summary of orthodoxy that all Biblical Christians would agree with. But I find myself responding to the author's expectation that he hopes "this little book" has made the centrality of Christ clear in NCT by saying "No, it has not."
May 7, 2023
Helpful introduction to the topic. Some parts of NCT seem convincing to me and others do not:
- Interpret OT in light of NT - Generally agree, until White connected this to the land promise.
- Old Covenant is temporary by design - Agree.
- The Law is a Unit - Agree.
- Christians not under law of Moses but the Law of Christ - Agree
- All members of NC community are fully forgiven and have Holy Spirit - Agree
- The church is the eschatological Israel. White argues that the church does not replace Israel but that "the church is the fulfillment of Israel by virtue of its union with the Jewish Messiah" (p. 44). - Disagree.
Areas of concern:
- I am not convinced that Romans 4:13 is a reference to the land promise to Abraham (p. 11). Along these lines, White's lengthy quote from Christopher Wright about how God "elevates" the land promise misses the mark (p. 12).
- White says, "Paul also says that Abraham was promised the Holy Spirit," based on Gal. 3:14. This is not what Paul says, though. Paul says that Christ redeemed us so that "the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith." While I agree that from a biblical theology perspective, the promise that Abraham's would be a "blessing to the nations" certainly must include the Holy Spirit's work. This does not imply that "Abraham was promised the Holy Spirit in any kind of direct sense. (pp. 12-13)
- White says, "Dispensationalism insists that God must keep his promises to ethnic Israel, but what is often left unsaid is that God only made promises to faithful Israel--and there is only one wholly faithful Israelite" (p. 45-56). White does not support the statement that "God only made promises to faithful Israel." It seems that many OT promises to Israel do not specify clearly whether they are to faithful Israel or not.
- In his discussion of Phil 3:2-3, White says, "Christians are the true circumcision. . . . To say that new covenant Christians are the circumcision is to say that the church is Israel (by virtue of being united to the Messiah)" (p. 47). This seems like a significant leap.
The introductory nature of this brief book prevents White from being able to go into any extended discussion on the texts involved, and therefore, he does not use space to anticipate objections to his arguments.
I appreciate White's intention to make Christ central and to make the Bible the primary support for NCT. The question of the church's fulfillment of OT promises to Israel remain the primary challenge to adopting NCT.
- Interpret OT in light of NT - Generally agree, until White connected this to the land promise.
- Old Covenant is temporary by design - Agree.
- The Law is a Unit - Agree.
- Christians not under law of Moses but the Law of Christ - Agree
- All members of NC community are fully forgiven and have Holy Spirit - Agree
- The church is the eschatological Israel. White argues that the church does not replace Israel but that "the church is the fulfillment of Israel by virtue of its union with the Jewish Messiah" (p. 44). - Disagree.
Areas of concern:
- I am not convinced that Romans 4:13 is a reference to the land promise to Abraham (p. 11). Along these lines, White's lengthy quote from Christopher Wright about how God "elevates" the land promise misses the mark (p. 12).
- White says, "Paul also says that Abraham was promised the Holy Spirit," based on Gal. 3:14. This is not what Paul says, though. Paul says that Christ redeemed us so that "the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith." While I agree that from a biblical theology perspective, the promise that Abraham's would be a "blessing to the nations" certainly must include the Holy Spirit's work. This does not imply that "Abraham was promised the Holy Spirit in any kind of direct sense. (pp. 12-13)
- White says, "Dispensationalism insists that God must keep his promises to ethnic Israel, but what is often left unsaid is that God only made promises to faithful Israel--and there is only one wholly faithful Israelite" (p. 45-56). White does not support the statement that "God only made promises to faithful Israel." It seems that many OT promises to Israel do not specify clearly whether they are to faithful Israel or not.
- In his discussion of Phil 3:2-3, White says, "Christians are the true circumcision. . . . To say that new covenant Christians are the circumcision is to say that the church is Israel (by virtue of being united to the Messiah)" (p. 47). This seems like a significant leap.
The introductory nature of this brief book prevents White from being able to go into any extended discussion on the texts involved, and therefore, he does not use space to anticipate objections to his arguments.
I appreciate White's intention to make Christ central and to make the Bible the primary support for NCT. The question of the church's fulfillment of OT promises to Israel remain the primary challenge to adopting NCT.
September 9, 2021
Pros:
- It's a quick read. You can knock it out in an hour or two.
- It will orient you to the main claims of NCT.
Cons:
- It's wrong (this isn't contributing to my rating, I've read lots of good books that are wrong)
- It fails at its mission, which is to distinguish itself from Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology, precisely because it doesn't understand Covenant Theology.
For example, White claims CT advocates baptize believers and unregenerate children. That's not true: Dutch Reformed especially, following Witsius, often presume regeneration of their children and baptize on that basis.
Likewise, White shows no understanding of the taxonomy of law that undergirds the claim that the 10 commandments are God's moral law on the basis of their unique alignment to natural law.
As a result of both of these misunderstandings, he finds himself swinging at straw men.
- The printing leaves a little to be desired, the top margin is cramped making it difficult to read
- He quotes Anabaptists favorably which honestly probably shouldn't go into my rating but heretics/whackos are a hard pass for me
- It's biblicist when it needs to be for the sake of the argument. To affirm that nearly every use of the word "law" is a reference to the Mosaic law is astonishing and misunderstands Paul at a very fundamental and important level. Romans 2 kinda ruins his whole thesis
So hey, it's worth a read if you want to grasp NCT on an introductory level. Just don't expect him to actually understand the views he's rejecting.
- It's a quick read. You can knock it out in an hour or two.
- It will orient you to the main claims of NCT.
Cons:
- It's wrong (this isn't contributing to my rating, I've read lots of good books that are wrong)
- It fails at its mission, which is to distinguish itself from Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology, precisely because it doesn't understand Covenant Theology.
For example, White claims CT advocates baptize believers and unregenerate children. That's not true: Dutch Reformed especially, following Witsius, often presume regeneration of their children and baptize on that basis.
Likewise, White shows no understanding of the taxonomy of law that undergirds the claim that the 10 commandments are God's moral law on the basis of their unique alignment to natural law.
As a result of both of these misunderstandings, he finds himself swinging at straw men.
- The printing leaves a little to be desired, the top margin is cramped making it difficult to read
- He quotes Anabaptists favorably which honestly probably shouldn't go into my rating but heretics/whackos are a hard pass for me
- It's biblicist when it needs to be for the sake of the argument. To affirm that nearly every use of the word "law" is a reference to the Mosaic law is astonishing and misunderstands Paul at a very fundamental and important level. Romans 2 kinda ruins his whole thesis
So hey, it's worth a read if you want to grasp NCT on an introductory level. Just don't expect him to actually understand the views he's rejecting.
September 30, 2014
A basic introduction
This book is good for those just diving into NCT. it provides basic tenants of NCT and some of the logic behind them. This is a good primer for those exploring, but I would encourage people to also explore scholarly works. As far as the mentions of the other two interpretive systems are concerned, there are not too many mentions of either. It seems as if the author has only interacted with Presbyterian CT, and not with 1689 Federalism( a Reformed Baptist perspective on Covenant Theology). This book is very much so an introduction to the subject, and the book lives up to its title.
This book is good for those just diving into NCT. it provides basic tenants of NCT and some of the logic behind them. This is a good primer for those exploring, but I would encourage people to also explore scholarly works. As far as the mentions of the other two interpretive systems are concerned, there are not too many mentions of either. It seems as if the author has only interacted with Presbyterian CT, and not with 1689 Federalism( a Reformed Baptist perspective on Covenant Theology). This book is very much so an introduction to the subject, and the book lives up to its title.
May 23, 2020
In terms of covering new covenant theology, it did its job very well. However, I do wish that the author didn't, for lack of a better word, throw verses in. I can appreciate how brief this book is, but he should have taken a little more time to provide more context for the verses he was using. At times, more so near the end of the book than the begining, it came off as though he was looking for verses to support his point, rather than making his points based off the Bible.
January 8, 2021
Not too bad, but too brief.
What I appreciate about this book is White's prose and his irenic tone. The reading level for this book is low, reading it never felt intimidating and, as an introduction to NCT, most of his intended audience should be able to understand the big ideas that he is offering up. This was really impressive and made it enjoyable to read.
However, the thing I don't appreciate about this book are the extremely brief arguments for why I should embrace NCT over Dispensationalism or Covenant Theology. His arguments against both those systems reads almost like a comment section in a Facebook debate, lacking in exegetical refinement, rather than reading a published book you've paid for. Perhaps page count was an issue, and I wish his editor would have suggested to add an appendix at the end for the polemics to go along with the "further reading" section. Regardless, this sort of presentation doesn't do anyone good, for the budding New Covenant theologian, he is given surface arguments that will not stand the test and for the veteran Dispensationalist or Covenant theologian they are left to feel a bit frustrated as White "bulldozes" their system in three short sentences. No one wins.
In conclusion, this little book has a lot going on. Blake White has found a way to jampack very big concepts into a very brief introduction of New Covenant Theology (NCT). On one hand he does a great job at introducing the reader to the theological system that is NCT, but on the other hand he also sets NCT against two other theological systems, Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. Due to the books brevity, this is problematic, and it's here that this little volume can not bear the weight of its assigned task. For this reason it receives 3 stars.
I would recommend this to anyone interested in NCT, but would caution them to look out for shallow polemics.
What I appreciate about this book is White's prose and his irenic tone. The reading level for this book is low, reading it never felt intimidating and, as an introduction to NCT, most of his intended audience should be able to understand the big ideas that he is offering up. This was really impressive and made it enjoyable to read.
However, the thing I don't appreciate about this book are the extremely brief arguments for why I should embrace NCT over Dispensationalism or Covenant Theology. His arguments against both those systems reads almost like a comment section in a Facebook debate, lacking in exegetical refinement, rather than reading a published book you've paid for. Perhaps page count was an issue, and I wish his editor would have suggested to add an appendix at the end for the polemics to go along with the "further reading" section. Regardless, this sort of presentation doesn't do anyone good, for the budding New Covenant theologian, he is given surface arguments that will not stand the test and for the veteran Dispensationalist or Covenant theologian they are left to feel a bit frustrated as White "bulldozes" their system in three short sentences. No one wins.
In conclusion, this little book has a lot going on. Blake White has found a way to jampack very big concepts into a very brief introduction of New Covenant Theology (NCT). On one hand he does a great job at introducing the reader to the theological system that is NCT, but on the other hand he also sets NCT against two other theological systems, Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. Due to the books brevity, this is problematic, and it's here that this little volume can not bear the weight of its assigned task. For this reason it receives 3 stars.
I would recommend this to anyone interested in NCT, but would caution them to look out for shallow polemics.
December 3, 2022
4 stars (more like 3.5) not because I agree. 4 stars because he articulates the position in a clear, accessible way. He paints with a broad brush and I’d quibble over several unhelpful statements he makes in seeking to set up NCT as the only truly biblical way. However, the book achieves its aim, especially for its brevity.
Read
December 23, 2019Great primer!
I would recomend this read to anyone who grasps CT and DT. The book is written in a very understandable fashion. I would certainly recommend this book to any of my brothers as a NCT intro.
I would recomend this read to anyone who grasps CT and DT. The book is written in a very understandable fashion. I would certainly recommend this book to any of my brothers as a NCT intro.
August 13, 2017
Great short introduction.
Lots of theology packed in a small book. Written on a level that is easy to grasp with plenty of information for deeper study.
Lots of theology packed in a small book. Written on a level that is easy to grasp with plenty of information for deeper study.
July 21, 2019
A good, basic introduction to New Covenant Theology. Gave me the desire study further of the topics addressed in more detail.
March 11, 2020
Interesting, clear & succint, it puts forth well its point of view. But I still need to find a clear comparison to both Baptist covenantalism on one hand, and progressive covenantalism on the other.
August 19, 2021
Excellent little booklet. Easy to read and a great starting point! I hand this book out to all our church visitors. Highly recommend anything written by this author!
May 26, 2022
See this review. Couldn’t have said it better myself:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
April 27, 2023
A helpful, brief summary of NCT. Certainly not exhaustive but sure leave the reader with lots to chew on.
July 31, 2025
Concise overview of New Covenant Theology. Just an intro.
December 27, 2012
This is a brief primer on the attempts to forge a middle ground between covenant theology and dispensationalism. White does not attempt to delve too deeply into his defense of his positions. He simply wants to introduce New Covenant Theology and highlight some of the reasons it is preferable to the other systems. In doing this, he quickly drew my praise and my ire. I was glad he stated that Covenant Theology does not have biblical basis for its foundational premises of covenants and that since the church has not replaced Israel, the law cannot be divided up into moral, ceremonial, dietary, etc. portions.
At the same time, White quickly and inexplicably aligns dispensationalism with C. I. Scofield. He never mentions Darby. He also does not address the arguments put forth by Ryrie and thus merely states that biblical interpretation must commence with the New Testament. All Old Testament prophecies are quickly swept up to in fulfillment in Christ. Thus, he ends up talking out of both sides of his mouth. He denies promoting replacement theology, but he ultimately ends up doing just that. The church does not presently replace Israel. It ultimately does. I need to read more on the subject to figure out what all this means. His explanation of Romans 11 was hasty and unconvincing.
Overall, White accomplishes his job. He puts the issues out on the table and shows a new alternative with an irenic spirit. The advocates of New Covenant Theology are an impressive lineup of scholars and pastors. This pushes me to understand it further.
At the same time, White quickly and inexplicably aligns dispensationalism with C. I. Scofield. He never mentions Darby. He also does not address the arguments put forth by Ryrie and thus merely states that biblical interpretation must commence with the New Testament. All Old Testament prophecies are quickly swept up to in fulfillment in Christ. Thus, he ends up talking out of both sides of his mouth. He denies promoting replacement theology, but he ultimately ends up doing just that. The church does not presently replace Israel. It ultimately does. I need to read more on the subject to figure out what all this means. His explanation of Romans 11 was hasty and unconvincing.
Overall, White accomplishes his job. He puts the issues out on the table and shows a new alternative with an irenic spirit. The advocates of New Covenant Theology are an impressive lineup of scholars and pastors. This pushes me to understand it further.
October 16, 2012
This is a very concise introduction to New Covenant theology just as the title promises. The author explains the purpose of this theology is to be informed by scripture and not to impose a system upon scripture as he asserts Dispensationalists and Covenant theologians do. He does not spend time refuting other theologies as he is merely introducing New Covenant teachings.
Fundamentally, scripture is to be read with Christ as the center of scripture and redemptive history, indeed of all things. God had one plan and its fulfillment was Christ, and God's revelation culminated in Christ coming, dying, rising, and reigning.
This interpretation of scripture posits that the old covenant was temporary, Christians are bound by the law of Christ not of Moses, and that the Church--a priesthood of believers indwelt by the Spirit--is the eschatological Israel.
The author does well in adhering to his assertion that he seeks not to impose a system on scripture but to have scripture inform his theology. He cites a large amount of the new testament and the prophets in a short space. In sum it is a very quick and readable introduction to the subject.
Fundamentally, scripture is to be read with Christ as the center of scripture and redemptive history, indeed of all things. God had one plan and its fulfillment was Christ, and God's revelation culminated in Christ coming, dying, rising, and reigning.
This interpretation of scripture posits that the old covenant was temporary, Christians are bound by the law of Christ not of Moses, and that the Church--a priesthood of believers indwelt by the Spirit--is the eschatological Israel.
The author does well in adhering to his assertion that he seeks not to impose a system on scripture but to have scripture inform his theology. He cites a large amount of the new testament and the prophets in a short space. In sum it is a very quick and readable introduction to the subject.
February 25, 2014
This book is a clear and solid introduction of the basic ideas of New Covenant Theology, it is of easy reading and that makes it available for everyone interested in start deep studies on the subjects.
It presents the basic 7 Christ-centered doctrines in a clear way and encourages the reader to look in Scripture for the proofs.
Highly recommended!
It presents the basic 7 Christ-centered doctrines in a clear way and encourages the reader to look in Scripture for the proofs.
Highly recommended!
October 7, 2014
So clear
i choose five stars rating because it is too clear to understand what the bible say of how we can interpretate the bible...
i woul like to recomend this book to those who are inconfort with the way how interpretate the bible the covenat Theology and dispensationalism system....
i choose five stars rating because it is too clear to understand what the bible say of how we can interpretate the bible...
i woul like to recomend this book to those who are inconfort with the way how interpretate the bible the covenat Theology and dispensationalism system....
May 17, 2012
It is a worthwhile purchase, and definitely easy to read. An important subject in such a small book! I wrote slightly more at my blog on this.
May 27, 2013
Basic and clear. I read it in a day, so it's a good starting point.
January 9, 2014
A short but helpful book on New Covenant Theology that serves as a great intro. Can also be used for material for teaching or leading a church to understand NCT better.
October 21, 2014
A great primer for those interested in what New Covenant Theology is all about!
April 22, 2023
Good, concise explanation of what NCT is. Certainly better than CT, but strongly disagree on some points of NCT. Several verses taken out of context.
October 11, 2012
Excellent book!
Read
October 8, 2014Easy to read. Concisely and clearly works through the relevant texts in an engaging way.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews