I’m Not Kidding—That’s What He Said
A reader sent me a manuscript from the 2011 John Bunyan Conference in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. Basically, the yearly event is a New Covenant Theology love-fest. This year’s conference had many of the who’s who of NCT including John Reisinger and Fred Zaspel. NCT is a tenet of Gospel Sanctification which was mothered by Sonship Theology. NCT, like GS’s other tenets, was developed to bolster Sonship. The two, GS and NCT, go hand in hand. Determined to hold fast to the concept of being sanctified by the same gospel that saves us, advocates have been hard at work since 1980 (approx.) to make the rest of the Bible fit with the aforementioned concept. The result is the following: NCT, Heart Theology, Christian Hedonism, and a gospel-centered hermeneutic borrowed from Redemptive-Historical hermeneutics—invented by liberal theologian Johann Philipp Gabler (1753-1826).
The manuscript was the text of one of the speakers, Chad Bresson—radio personality and elder at Clearcreek Chapel in Springboro, Ohio. Clearcreek Chapel considers themselves a NCT church (according to another elder there, Dale Evans), and their doctrine is the epitome of Gospel Sanctification. The reader who sent the manuscript referred to Bresson as the “Golden Boy of Gospel Sanctification” in central Ohio. Gagingly, I would have to agree. The opening line of the manuscript, a twenty-nine page linguistic drone, finally surpasses the outrageous absurdity of Bresson’s “Another Brick in the Wall,” in which he creepily / cultishly suggested that the original sin in the garden was not disobedience, but the sin of not submitting to the authority of teachers/ elders. But truly, his thesis and opening line on this one takes the cake:
“Stephen was killed for preaching New Covenant Theology.” I’m not kidding—that’s what he said. I can just see him opening his message (after a silent pause) with this, supposedly, profound capture. First of all, nobody denies that NCT is a recent creation. Richard Barcellos, in his excellent critique of NCT, “In Defense Of The Decalogue,” voiced concern in the book’s preface that the movement was still in its developmental stages, and therefore, difficult to evaluate. That was in 2001. Bresson’s thesis is therefore indicative of NCT’s extreme arrogance—they are supposedly the gatekeepers of this newfound truth some two-thousand years later, and I will give you three wild guesses as to who they think would stone them today. This is why an us against them mentality saturates many GS / Sonship / NCT churches.
After suffering through about twelve pages of the obituary-like document, a few statements begged attention that somehow fail to alarm Christians of our day. First, that the New Covenant abrogated the law, and that all former covenants were cancelled by the NC as well. Of course, as Barcellos points out in his book, the first point blatantly contradicts Jeremiah 31:33, Matthew 5:17, and Romans 3:31. As far as the second point that caught my attention like a penguin singing “I Just Gotta Be Me” in the midst of the flock, it blatantly contradicts Ephesians 2: 11,12 where Paul likens the unregenerate to those “alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants [PLURAL NOT SINGULAR] of promise.” Furthermore, Paul then cites an excerpt from the Decalogue to make a point in Ephesians 6:1-3 making it clear that the “promise” thereof still applies to us today. All of the gallons of ink spilled by Bresson will not stand against these few verses of Scripture—truth does not bow to a myriad of words.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Paul,
Heb 8:13 NIV says: “By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.”
Do you believe the Old Covenant Ceremonial Laws with Levitical priests, animal sacrifices, washings, and sprinkling with blood should still be going as a requirement? I don’t. Is the law of circumcision still required in your church? Ha! You sound Baptist, I doubt it!
I do agree about the continuing moral laws, including the Big Ten. However, a big controversy in my world is over the Civil laws given for National Isreal. Are you a Theonomist? Do you believe we should try patterning U.S. civil government after ancient laws given to Isreal such as, Year of Jubilee, divorce laws, consanguinity laws, etc.. If not, what standards would you suggest for America? Ha!
Hey look, I’m kidding around here, you don’t have to answer all these questions! I’m just making a point about Biblical law. It always leads to a further question of what law? Lots of variation in the Christian world about law. The worst mistake, as you have noted, is throwing out the moral laws.
Once again, thanks for the update above. I had no idea all these guys were connected and so well organized. You’ve definately got them figured out and exposed for what they are.
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
Bill, Actually, I think those are good questions. Here is my short answer: we don’t stone rebellious children to death anymore, but does that civil law still offer us valuable information / counsel for certain situations? Do the civil laws still teach us about how God thinks about certain situations? In fact, many of the civil laws coincide with NT commands in regard to revenge etc. Though not applicable for today–they still teach.
If we live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God, this and many other reasons make the complete eradication of OT “covenants of PROMISE” impossible.
paul
> —–Original Message—– >
LikeLike
Good points Paul,
yeah, we learn from everything in Scripture OT & NT. However, this Kingdom of our Lord is different and will be the last Kingdom standing. We’ve got a new King, High Priest, Prophet, and “Mediator of a New Covenant (Heb 12:24).” Things are being shaken now, “so that what cannot be shaken may remain (Heb 12:27).” The King while on earth showed us how He interpreted Law mixed with mercy and love. This was something new. Obviously, we still serve a divorce hating God (“I hate divorce;” Mal 2:16), but Jesus didn’t instantly demand all adulterers stoned. He even modified what Moses said about divorce and remarriage (Matt 19). He went around doing good, healing all who were under the power of the devil (working) on the Sabbaoth! Pharisees by contrast took a strict view of Law; no works whatsoever! Stone um, NOW!
I’ve got a long way to go in my learning. I’m still not sure about many issues of life. But we need to be learning and putting into practice. Not just preaching the Gospel to ourselves with repetition. Ha! How shallow can they get! Thanks.
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
Bill, No doubt, covenant theology is very complex. However, I’m amazed at our shortcomings (we Christians in general) in understanding this extremely important subject. paul
> —–Original Message—– >
LikeLike
Well the simplest answer is: does God change? No.Therefore does His word the bible cease in any part at all to be true? No again. My brothers and sisters, i am far from perfect but Jesus Christ said, “if you love Me, keep my commandments.” That’s not the ceremonial law God gave the Jews through Moses, but the moral law simply encapsulated in the 10 commandments. God said we are to be holy because He is holy; consider these things then ask yourself what right you or i have to change the meaning of God’s word and happily carry on sinning. “By their fruit you shall know them.”
LikeLike
Yep, God’s commands are to us.
> —–Original Message—– >
LikeLike