Covenant Theology vs Dispensationalism

Sa. This morning we're continuing a series on covenant theology, which I began last time we worshiped together. We at that point looked at the biblical teaching about God being a covenant keeping God. This morning we'll be talking kind of theologically a little bit different than what we usually have when I exhort you in the Lord's day. But I want to give you a lesson on the difference between covenant theology and dispensational theology. And I think it will be be rewarding not just for your heads, but for your hearts as well. We're going to read in that vein Galatians 3, beginning at the 15th verse, down to verse 22. Hear now God's word, brethren. I speak after the manner of men. Though it be but a man's covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one makes it void, or adds thereto. Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed he saith not. And to seeds as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed which is Christ. Now this I a covenant confirmed beforehand by God. The law which came 430 years after, doth not disannul so as to make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise. But God hath granted it to Abraham by promise. What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made. And it was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator. Now, a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then, against the promises of God? God forbid. For if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been of the law. But the Scripture shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe thus far the reading of God's Word. When we think of the difference between covenant theology and dispensational theology, if that terminology is familiar to you at all, I think you know that we tend to look toward the future. We look at the different views those theological schools have about what's going to happen in the future. As we say, they have millennial differences of opinion. One sees the millennium in this light, expects the following sorts of things to happen, and the other sees it much differently. However, if we were to properly understand what covenant theology is all about and how it differs from dispensational theology, which is so popular in our day, we would have to go the other direction to find what the real root problem with dispensational theology is and what the true biblical glory and strength of covenant theology is. The differences do not originate in various views of the future, but rather come from different views of God's redemptive work in the past. So we continue to study what the Bible has to say to us about God being a covenant keeping God. And as we see what the course of redemptive history is like and how God has worked covenantally with his people, we'll set over against the biblical teaching that there is a covenant of grace that God has used throughout history to save his people. We'll set that over against the dispensational distinctives about redemptive history. And then we'll understand, although we won't get to that point today, we'll understand why covenant theologians and dispensationalists must differ about God's future plans for his kingdom as well. We've seen already that God reveals Himself in the pages of Scripture specifically as a covenant keeping God. It is not as though you could have a picture of God with which has all the other biblical features to it, and then omit that He's a covenant keeping God and you'd be real close to getting the biblical message. If you leave out that He's a God of covenant, you have missed a major aspect of the biblical revelation about God. To understand his person and the way in which he works to understand these things properly, we must see God in light of the covenant he has made and the way he fulfills that covenant with his people. We saw last time that God's relationship with man. From the very beginning of time, God's relationship with man was covenantal in nature. The covenant that God entered into with Adam was gracious. It was sovereignly imposed, it was mutually binding. It called for trust and submission on Adam's part. And it carried sanctions, blessings and curses dependent upon Adam's response to God's covenant. These very same elements will be seen in God's continuing covenantal relationship with his people. We will see that the covenant God makes is gracious. It is sovereignly imposed, it is mutually binding. It calls for trust and submission on the part of God's people. And it carries sanctions, blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience and rebellion. So we see in a sense the covenant already in its seed form before Adam falls into sin. But once Adam fell into sin, God mercifully re established a covenantal relationship with him. Adam fell into sin by breaking covenant with God. Disobeying his prohibition of eating of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. And God could have justly brought the sanctions of the covenant upon him in such a way that that he would have endured death fully and immediately. And that would have been the end of the human race. And if God had done that, no one, of course, there wasn't anybody else to complain, but no one could possibly bring a charge against him. God would simply have been living up to his covenant. Now, because the covenant is mutually binding, God did need to impose the sanction of death on Adam. But you need to see the way in which God did did that. He did not bring the consummation of death in all aspects of Adam's life. Immediately Adam died spiritually. And we see the results of that spiritual death already working their way out in the earliest chapters of the Bible. You know, once Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, they were ashamed. Before the fall, the Bible tells us, they were naked and unashamed. But now they stood before each other and their sexuality was something of shame to them. They knew they had done wrong, and so they wanted to clothe themselves. Moreover, they wanted to hide from God. They knew that the fellowship between each other had been breached, but also the fellowship with God all the more had been broken by their eating of the fruit. And so they hid from God. And we see that when God encountered Adam and Eve, what we have here is just one long chain of guilt transference. See, Adam says it's the woman's fault. Eve says it's the serpent's fault. And what you have is all of creation is topsy turvy. You have human nature submitting to the animal world, supposed to have dominion over the animals. Eve should have told the serpent to get in its proper place and to stop talking back to God. She didn't. She submitted to the serpent. And then we see Adam, who was supposed to be head over his wife, submitting to his wife in her sinful suggestion that he eat as well. See, everything is wrong. And so everyone's blaming everybody else who God imposes another form of death. We see in the biological order itself the resistance now of the created order to meet man's needs. He's going to have to labor in the sweat of his brow with thorns and thistles. And now that which was supposed to be a joy, childbirth. As more and more God builds up his kingdom, childbirth becomes laborious as well. That's why we call it labor. When women give birth, that comes because of sin. Death is working its way out and death works its way out among the children of Adam and Eve. In the earliest chapters of the Bible, we also read that murder takes place within a family. So God did impose spiritual death. And that works its way out socially, psychologically, emotionally. It works its way out in many dreadful ways and eventually will bring about the final physical death and then spiritual separation from God forever. But you see, when God brought the sanction of the covenant upon Adam, in imposing death, he also re established the covenant with Adam. So in the meantime, between the imposition of spiritual death and the final eternal separation from God, in the meantime, there would be an opportunity for redemption. When Adam fell into sin, God mercifully re established a covenantal relationship with him, one in which the great gracious and the promissory character of the covenant became even further accentuated. There was promise and there was grace in the previous covenant. But now, after the fall, God's promise and grace are accentuated. God's grace was magnified in that he promised to send a Savior who would destroy this tempter, Satan. Look at your Bibles at Genesis 3:15, which is often called by theologians the protoevangelium, the first declaration of the gospel. Genesis 3:15. God says, I will put enmity between thee and the woman, that is, between Satan and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. God says, in very simple terms, I'm sending one who is going to crush you. The one that had led the human race into sin and destruction would himself now be destroyed, his head crushed in the process. The one who comes to do that will have a bruised heel. There will be the infliction upon the Savior pain, but it will be pain unto victory. It will be a pain that brings about the defeat of the tempter himself. And we know that this first promise of the gospel, this first promise of a coming Savior, this first promise that God would set things right between himself and man, was fulfilled when Jesus came into the world. Turn in your bibles to John 12, verses 31 and 30, 32 John 12, 31. Now is the judgment of this world. Jesus says, now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself. The gospel writer goes on to remind us of the this lifting up was a reference to the way he would die being lifted up on the cross. Jesus said, and if I be lifted up on the cross, if my heel is bruised, to use the Old Testament language, the outcome will be the crushing of the head of Satan. And all men will now be drawn unto me. Look at First John, chapter 3, verse 8. First John 3:8. The apostle tells us that he who does sin is of the devil. For the devil sins from the beginning to this end. For this reason was the Son of God manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil. So back there in Genesis 3:15, we have the first promise of the Gospel, that the Savior would come come to destroy the works of the devil. And Jesus is the one who fulfills that promise and does so begins to do so at his first advent. Then in the subsequent pages of Scripture, God expands upon that first promise of the Gospel. He explains that promise in greater detail. Particularly, he expands on that promise by giving further covenants into which he enters with his people. And the real underlying question that we have to answer as we study the flow of redemptive history in the Bible is what is the relationship of these various covenants to one another? When God enters into these various covenants, how do they relate to one another? The Bible teaches us that these covenants were thoroughly gracious in character. They were established by God himself and established for the undeserved benefit of sinful and unworthy men. The aim of those covenants was that he would be their God. They didn't deserve him, but he would be their God, and they would be made his people. And so in Jeremiah 11, we read in verses two through four, Hear the words of this covenant. So shall you be my people, and I will be your God. At base, that is the most precious, that is essential, that is the basic promise of God. I am for you, you are for me. These covenants were not based upon the accomplishments of God's people. They were never based upon the worthiness or the righteousness of God's people. They always stemmed, according to the teaching of the Bible, from His loving kindness toward them. I read last night for you Deuteronomy 7. Let me remind you verses 7 to 9 of Deuteronomy 7. The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because you were murdered is difficult to translate. Sometimes you'll have Bible versions of trans translated as mercy because it's very strongly connoting mercy, but it has a sense of loyalty to it as well. It's mercy that is a loyal mercy, and thus covenant love. Many translations will give the English for this word covenant love or loving kindness. God shows his covenant loyalty, his mercy, loving kindness to you. That's what's being said. All in that one very pregnant Hebrew Word. Why does God enter into covenant with man? Does he need man? No. Does man have anything to offer? No. Has man accomplished anything? No. Why then does God enter into covenant? Because of his hesed, his loyalty and love and compassion. The various covenants of which we read in the Old Testament were all covenants of God's promise. And this includes the covenant of law that was established through Moses. None of the Old Testament covenants were legalistic covenants. None of those covenants were ungracious covenants. This is a vital point because dispensationalism classically has taught that in the Mosaic covenant, God offered, at least hypothetically, God offered that his people would be right with him on the basis of their obedience to his law, that if they did works of righteousness, if they had their own established merit with him, then he would be their God. Dispensationalism says that, at least hypothetically was offered in the Old Testament. And dispensationalism is dead wrong. The Bible tells us that not one of the covenants after the fall of man can be seen or interpreted in a legalistic and ungracious light. That's why I had us read Galatians 3 this morning for our scripture reading. In Galatians 3, Paul categorically and clearly declares, the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed the promises, and then he goes on the law. This is Moses. Now, the law does not set aside the covenant previously established by God with Abraham. The law does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends upon promise. Is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? In the Greek, it's me Genotype. Translated in my translation, God forbid. Or you could put it absolutely not, Not a chance. By no means could you see it in that way. Paul does an interesting thing in Galatians 3 as he begins this discussion. He says at the outset in verse 15, Brothers, I speak after the manner of men. Though it be but a man's covenant, yet when it has been confirmed, no one makes it void or adds thereto. What he says is, you know how covenants work. Let me just talk to you as men. Let me just talk to you in earthly terms. Let me speak to you in human terms. Even among men, when a covenant has been cut, when you have established and confirmed a covenant, you just think about it. When you've entered into some legal contract, once the covenant is confirmed, it's established, you can't go back and Change it. And you can't add anything to it, at least not without the agreement of the other covenant partner. The point is, no one has the right to change change the terms of a covenant once it's been signed and executed, that covenant holds. Paul says, that's true among men. Now, if that's true among men, what do you expect from God? The covenant keeping God, the loyal, loving, compassionate God. Do you think he's going to establish a covenant with Abraham and later he's going to say, no, I've changed my mind, we're going to do it this way. Now, you see, Paul says in Galatians 3 that is absolutely impossible. He says, the covenant that came 430 years later than Abraham, the covenant made through Moses cannot disannul the promise. God cannot now have a covenant that says, well, try to save yourself by works, try to keep the law, and you'll be all right with me. Paul insists that whatever you see in the Mosaic covenant is consistent with the promissory nature of the Abrahamic covenant covenant. Moses brings greater detail. But Moses cannot change the essential principle of promise. That's what was established with Abraham. And so Paul asks this question, which our dispensational brothers and sisters need to hear. Paul says, is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? Can you see Moses as a legalistic covenant? Can you pit the Mosaic Law against what God said to Abraham? His answer? Absolutely not. It's an insult to the very character of God, the covenant keeping God, the faithful God, that he would do such a thing. Indeed, from the perspective of Paul, all of the Jewish covenants, whether they remain with Abraham, Moses or David, what have you, all of the Jewish covenants were elaborations, elaborations upon one single basic promise of God. How do I know that? Ephesians 2:12 may be the most helpful verse next to the Galatians 3:1 that I just read about. Absolutely not about changing this covenantal principle. Ephesians 2:12 may be the most helpful verse in talking to your dispensational friends. Paul is talking about the unity of Jew and Gentile in the church. And he goes back and traces how the Gentiles once didn't have this privilege. Verse 11. Wherefore remember that once, you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who were called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh, made by hands, that you were at that time separate from Christ, you didn't have the privilege of the Jews, you were separate from the Messiah, you were separate from the Christ, the Savior of men. You were alienated from the commonwealth of Israel. You were strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world. So Paul is in the process of explaining how the Gentiles previously were outside God's saving provision, apart from coming to Israel and being circumcised. But now in the church, there's one body, Jew and Gentile alike. But notice what he says about the covenants, that they did not enjoy these Gentiles. He says, you were alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of the promise. That short expression is very important. The covenants of the promise. Many covenants, plural, one promise. And all of the covenants were built upon that single promise of God. From the perspective of Paul, all of the Old Testament covenants were covenants of promise and elaborations upon God's basic promise of salvation. Therefore, although there were many covenants made throughout the Old Testament, it would be biblically accurate to view them as explanations of a single promise that God had given. They were part of what we might now call the covenant of grace. One basic promise. The covenant, it's a gracious one, It's a promise. The covenants of the promise, it's a gracious promise. They were all explanations of the single promise of God and thus can be called the covenant of grace, being administrations and applications of God's gracious promise of salvation. The provisions of God's promise were progressively made known throughout redemptive history. As you read your Bible, basically what you're doing is getting more and more elaboration and detail on God's promise of salvation. Each and every one of the provisions that God gave in the Old Testament, each and every one of those particular promises given by God in the Old Testament pointed to Christ and His saving work. They pointed to the coming Savior. Second Corinthians 1:20 says, for however many may be, the promises of God in Christ is the yes wherefore also through him is the amen unto the glory of God through us. No matter how many promises you find, whatever you consider, every one of those promises was yes and amen in Christ. Which is just a dramatic way of saying affirmed yes in Christ and confirmed amen in Him. None of the promises of God are fulfilled outside of Christ. All of the promises point to the coming Savior. Every promise in all of those covenants was affirmed and confirmed in Christ. And that's why when Christ, the resurrected Lord, encountered His downcast disciples on the road To Emmaus. That first Easter morning we read that beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted for them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. Luke 24, verse 27. Jesus went through the entire Old Testament. He said, now don't you understand? Every one of these promises was about the same Savior to come. All of the Old Testament. That is the document of the old covenant, if you will. All of the Old Testament was about Christ, the coming savior. In John 5:39, Jesus said, you search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life. These Scriptures testify about me. Hebrews 9:15 calls Jesus the mediator of a new covenant. The new covenant was announced by Jeremiah the prophet in Jeremiah 31, 31:34. And according to the book of Hebrews, Jesus mediates that covenant. He's the one who brings all these provisions. He's the one who fulfills the promise of the old by establishing the new. And so Hebrews says that he's the mediator of a new covenant in order that they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. The promise that was given will now be inherited by those who are in Christ. We see that with all of the Old Testament covenants. You might want to go home and study this this afternoon. We don't have time to read every one of the passages ourselves. But what is it that Abraham was promised? He was promised that all nations would be blessed in him, that he would be given an inheritance, a land of promise. And in the New Testament we read that Christ gained that land of promise that was originally given by oath to Abraham. In Hebrews 11, 8, 10, the author of Hebrews tells us, Abraham looked for a city whose builder and maker was God. And that heavenly city, that kingdom of God, has been established by Christ. And he. In Galatians 3:16, our scripture reading this morning, where Paul says the promises were made to Abraham and to his seed. Not many seeds, but one, that is to Jesus. The quotation the promises to you into your seed comes right out of the Old Testament promise of the land being given to Abraham. And Paul says that was fulfilled in Christ. In Ephesians 1:14. We're told that we have the inheritance in Christ. In 1 Peter 1:4, Peter tells us that the land of promise has now been granted to us who are going to go to heaven one day. All the nations are going to be blessed in Christ according to the New Testament. Luke 2:32. In Matthew 12:21, Jesus says, All men will come to him. Acts 13:47, 48. The kingdom is going to to all the world. Moreover, Christ is the model of righteousness that the Mosaic covenant was talking about. The law of Moses gives all these do's and don'ts. Where do we find that illustrated in Christ? He is our perfect righteousness. Matthew 5:17 shows him upholding the law. In Hebrews 4:15 we're told he was tempted in all points, yet without sin. First John 2:5, we are told that he was blameless and harmless. Not only is Jesus the model of the Mosaic covenants law, he is the true and perfect atoning sacrifice prescribed by the Mosaic Law. The whole book of Hebrews, but chapter nine, especially of Hebrews, tells us that Christ came to be that sacrifice that Moses prescribed. David was prosper, that there would be a king who would come from his own loins, one that would be born that would establish a kingdom that has no end. The New Testament says Christ is this Davidic King. Luke 1:32, 33 Acts 5:31. He's been appointed a prince over Israel to grant repentance. 1st Timothy 6:15. He's the king of kings and the lord of lords. First Corinthians 15:25. And he must reign till every enemy is put under his feet. And so what was promised to Abraham is fulfilled in Jesus. What was promised to Moses is fulfilled in Jesus. What was promised to David is fulfilled in Jesus. Let's see if we can put all of what I taught you this morning together in a little package and then set it over against dispensationalism. Because all of the covenants after man fell into sin were gracious in character being elaborations upon God's promise of salvation. And two, because subsequent covenants cannot conflict with earlier ones, but can only complement and expand upon them. And three, because all of the promises in God's covenant centered on Christ and on his redemptive work, then what we recognize is the unity and continuity of the covenantal administrations of God. Let me say that again. We recognize the unity and the continuity of God's covenantal administrations. All of them were gracious covenants. All of them were in harmony with each other, not conflicting with each other. All of them centered on Christ and his redemptive work. And that's what we mean very simply when we speak of covenant theology. Now, you know, you hear that term bantered about often seems like a slogan or just some kind of, you know, word that we pull out of the sky to solve problems. But there's something behind that terminology that's shorthand to speak of. Covenant theology is to speak of a theological perspective. Now, those of you who are taking notes, I'm going to repeat this for you now. This is to speak of a theological perspective where all of the post fall covenants are gracious in character. All of these subsequent covenants do not conflict with each other, but complement and expand upon one another. And thirdly, all of the promises within these covenants center on Christ and his redemptive work. That's covenant theology. And if you read the Bible, it just seems to me it jumps right off the page at you, right? It seems very obvious. And yet you probably realize I'm bringing poles to Newcastle to even tell this group this. You know that covenant theology is probably not the majority opinion among evangelical churches in our day. Sadly, it should be. It's biblical, thoroughly healthy and revealed by God should be obvious. But it's not. Dispensational theology is the key competitor with covenant theology for the hearts and affections, the beliefs of evangelicals, those who profess the gospel. In our day and age, dispensational theology has enjoyed Widespread endorsement among 20th century evangelical schools and churches. And its influence, sadly, has even been found among some Reformed preachers. We find some Presbyterians who have been infected with a dispensational way of looking at God's redemptive plan rather than a covenantal one. What is at the heart of dispensational theology is the denial of the the covenant of grace. I just explained to you what the covenant of grace is and what covenant theology is. Dispensationalism denies that. How is it that dispensationalism denies it? Three ways in particular. And I want to end with this. It's going to take me a couple more minutes. We're not quite done, but I want you to see the three ways in which dispensationalism denies the unity and the continuity of God's covenantal administrations. The covenant of grace is denied by dispensationalists when they claim that God has two plans, not one revealed in the Scriptures. Two plans, one a plan regarding Christ in the church. The church is a mixed multitude, Jew and Gentile. God has one plan for Christ in the church, but God has a distinct plan regarding the Jewish people themselves and the land of Palestine where Jesus will one day become the Davidic King. Dispensationalists say this is what makes us distinctive. We believe that there's one plan for Christ in the church and another plan for the Jews in the land where Jesus will come to be the Davidic King. Dispensationalists themselves sometimes refer to these distinct plans and these distinct peoples of God as God's heavenly program and God's earthly program. The Church has a heavenly calling. The Jews have an earthly program that God is going to fulfill. And thus dispensationalists insist on drawing a dichotomy between Israel and the Church. This is set forth like Charles Rearing's. Dispensationalism today sets this forth as the key point of dispensational theology. That there must be a dichotomy drawn between Israel, for whom God has a separate earthly plan, and the Church that is under the saving work of Jesus and is kind of a heavenly program. Israel and the Church must be separated according to the dispensationalists, but not according to Paul. Paul called the mixed Galatian congregation, Jew and Gentile alike. Paul called that congregation the Israel of God. You look at it in your Bibles, Galatians 6:16, he pronounced the benediction upon the Israel of God. Paul didn't strictly separate Israel from the Church. He saw the Church as Israel. Also in the book of Galatians, he calls those who believe in Christ the true children of Abraham. And in Ephesians 2:12, he is so bold as to say that Gentiles who are now saved by Christ have been brought near to the commonwealth of Israel. So the Church is the Israel of God, the true children of Abraham. And we have been brought into the very commonwealth, the nation of Israel, by our belief in Jesus Christ. The first distinctive of dispensationalism is contrary to the teaching of the apostle Paul. Secondly, dispensationalists deny the unity of Old Testament covenants. For they teach that there's a root difference between the gracious character of the Abrahamic covenant and the alleged legalistic character of the Mosaic covenant. They maintain that God granted his blessings to Abraham on the basis of promise. But in the Mosaic era, God held out, hypothetically, the offer of blessing based on meritorious obedience to the law. That too is contrary to Paul. We've had one real important strike against dispensationalism, this Israel church dichotomy. Now they say, well, the Old Testament was legalistic. The New Testament was is gracious. In Romans 9:31 and 32, Paul wrote that Israel did not arrive at the righteousness of the law. And why is that? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were, by works. Paul tells us what was wrong with Israel in the Old Testament. They sought to please God by works and not by faith. The Mosaic law itself was have taught them not to be legalists. That's why in Galatians 2:19, Paul says, I through the law died to the law. The law taught me not to be a legalist. The covenant God made with Abraham could not be disannulled 430 years later by the covenant made with Moses because that would make the promise of God of none effect. That's what we read this morning in Galatians 3:17. Was the law against the promises of God? Do you remember Paul's answer? God forbid. Absolutely not. It's absolutely impossible. So dispensationalism is wrong to say Israel and the Church are separate. Dispensationalism is wrong to say Old Testament was legalistic. New Testament is gracious. And thirdly, finally, dispensationalists deny the covenant of grace by teaching that the benefits of the Abrahamic covenant which came to Jewish and Gentile believers in the Church are to be viewed somehow as tandem to or parallel to the benefits of the Mosaic and Davidic covenants which will come to the literal Jewish children of Abraham. That is to say, they say, God has covenants that are working in parallel. And so the Abrahamic promise is fulfilled in the the church for children of Abraham of a spiritual sort. But the literal children of Abraham are still going to have the promises made in the Mosaic and Davidic covenants fulfilled as they go back to the land re establish the temple and Jesus rules from an earthly throne as the Davidic king. And when will Jesus do that? When he returns to establish this earthly kingdom in Palestine. Now do you understand why we differ with dispensationalists about the future? It's because we differ with dispensationalists about the past. It's because we differ with their view of redemptive history. It's because we see the unity and the continuity of God's covenantal dealings with men. And they don't. And since they don't, they expect that God's covenants will not be all part of one basic promise fulfilled with the one unified people of God. But God has one promise for the Church and one promise for Israel. So Israel must go back to the land and Jesus must come and rule as the Davidic king there. I think we're in a position now, at the end of today's lesson to define covenant theology. Covenant theology is that major opponent and alternative to the popular dispensationalism we see in the evangelical church today. Covenant theology is based squarely upon the biblical teaching regarding the Covenant of grace According to covenant theology, which is what your own preacher believes. And so you need to know this is the way I see things when I preach the word to you. Covenant theology holds that all of the post fall covenants made by God are essentially one. That they center on God's gracious promise in Jesus Christ, so that each successive covenant expands on the previous ones rather than disregarding them or running parallel to them. There's one promise that just unfolds gradually through the Old Testament. The promises or the covenants do not run in parallel to each other and they don't cancel each other. We hold that all of the covenants prior to Christ were marked by anticipation. And thus the administration of those covenants was in the form of foreshadows. The temple, the priesthood, the animal sacrifices, all of these were anticipatory of the coming Savior. And the fulfillment or substance of those foreshadows is found in the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ. So that when Jesus came, he established the New Covenant, the New Covenant with the New Israel, which is the International Church of Christ. Covenant theology, dispensational theology. The issue here is the unity and the continuity of God's covenantal administrations throughout redemptive history. And that issue leads to amazing differences in other areas of theology, in our Christian walk and our expectation about the future. We'll take those things up as we continue our lessons. The next time I'm with you, let's pray. Our Lord and God, we thank you that you are a covenant keeping God. We thank you for your faithfulness, your reliability. We thank you that you are predictable, that we don't have to worry about reading in the Bible of things which you have changed your mind about or worrying that your various plans run parallel to each other and we are on the wrong track with you. Lord, we thank you that you do demonstrate your love for us and re establishing a covenantal relationship with our first Father Adam. We thank you for the graciousness of that relationship. We thank you for the continuity that is seen in the way that you've worked out that promise. How we thank you for all of the scripture, Lord, we confess we don't often show our gratitude by being diligent to read it and to see it in its full context. But as we stand back to see the grand flow and design that is revealed in your word, we do have occasion to praise you and to bow before you and thank you that you are a covenant keeping God. That you have made multiple wonderful promises and all of them have been fulfilled in Christ and through Christ are being fulfilled for us. That those of us who are Gentiles are nevertheless the true children of Abraham before you. That those of us who do not belong to the commonwealth of Israel nevertheless have the benefits of the nation of Israel here in our very midst now. We thank you that you have taken the kingdom away from that nation that despised and rejected you and have given it now to a nation producing the fruit thereof. Make us truly to produce the fruit of your grace. Help us here in our churches, in our particular church, to demonstrate the glory of your grace and your covenant faithfulness. We pray in Jesus name. Amen.