Distinguishing Covenant Theology from Dispensationalism

The following points were laid out and discussed in a Reconcile Church Miami Small Group. They are meant to provide directional insight when understanding/interpreting the Bible, particularly when interpretations from Dispensationalists are presented. They are offered here in summary format.

• Dispensationalism divides much of the Bible into disconnected eras and covenant theology sees more unity in all the different time periods of the Bible.
• Dispensationalists see the church starting at Pentecost, while covenant theology sees it beginning in Genesis. The church goes through changes in eras, but it is one church.
• Dispensationalism sees two separate agendas in the Bible, one for Israel and one for the church. Covenant theology sees one plan for Israel and the church in Christ not two plans.
• Dispensationalism sees the church as a part of God's plans to be followed by a time for Israel again. Covenant theology sees the church as the final and ultimate plan; not a plan B to then return to plan A (Israel).
• Dispensationalism sees different promises about different things for Israel concerning many temporal-earthly realities while seeing the church’s promises being more about spiritual Christ-focused promises. Covenant theology sees all the Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic promises to be ultimately understood in light of the work of Christ. Israel and the church’s promises were always spiritual and Christ-centered.
• Dispensationalism sees the new covenant in the New Testament to be the only eternal saving covenant and unrelated to other covenants in scripture. Covenant theology sees the Abrahamic-Davidic and new covenant to be the same covenant of grace administered in different eras from the very beginning. The new covenant is the same as the Abrahamic.Covenant theology would see the Abrahamic and new covenant being one and the same; the new covenant is the final and best administration of the Abrahamic. Dispensationalism would separate new covenant from all the Old Testament covenants. Covenant theology would see the Abrahamic and new covenant being one and the same; the new covenant is the final and best administration of the Abrahamic. Covenant theology would see discontinuity with the Mosaic covenant but not the Abrahamic or Davidic.
• Dispensationalism interprets the Bible only in its literal historic setting. Covenant theology interprets all the Bible in its literal historic setting but also in light of everything connecting to and being understood in the person and work of Christ. Christ’s person and work is the key to the whole Bible.
• Dispensationalism thinks that Christ will come back and bring back the Mosaic kingdom world for a thousand years and then Satan will come back and overthrow Christ and then God will bring the new heavens and new earth. Covenant theology believes that Christ has now already brought the Kingdom and that when Christ comes back he comes to bring the new heavens and the new earth not a 1000-year extension of the earthly.
• Dispensationalism denies the existence of a covenant of works with Adam and also denies a covenant of grace in all scripture. Since dispensationalism denies the covenant of works and grace as distinct categories, they mix law and grace often. Covenant theology states that there is a covenant of works and one of grace and that they are distinct and not confused.
• Dispensationalism views much of the Bible moralistically since they do not interpret all the stories in a redemptive Christ-specific way. Covenant theology sees all the Bible in every part Christo-centrically.
• Dispensationalism separates the law of God in the Old Testament with the New Testament while covenant theology sees the law of God to be the same in both testaments; the only differences is that it is administered with some differences though it is the same law. Dispensationalists would not see any of the Old Testament commands applying to the church while Covenant theology sees some applying to the church in the same manner, others applying differently and others not at all.
• Dispensationalists will not see the law of God in the works arrangement as an ongoing means to crush us of our sin (first use of the law) since the Old Testament law in every way is no longer valid. Covenant theology believes that the covenant of works still is a tool to crush us of our self-righteousness. We still need to hear the law of God preached to crush us in our self-righteousness.
• Dispensationalists do not see the signs in Old Testament to be about the same realities as New Testament. Covenant theology sees all signs pointing to the same Christ-centered truths simply from different eras.
• Dispensationalists deny a law and gospel distinction in the Bible and would say that law and gospel are mixed in all things. Covenant theology separates and distinguishes law and gospel and see it as an important interpretive category for all the Bible.
• Dispensationalism will not interpret theology Old Testament with New Testament but will interpret New Testament with Old Testament. Covenant theology sees “Christ's coming” as the key to see all scripture and so we understand the Old Testament by the New Testament.
• Dispensationalism believes that Christ's kingdom is future with Israel on earth in a literal 1000 year kingdom. Covenantal theology concludes that the kingdom of Christ is present in the church after his ascension and will be visible in the new heavens and new earth and that it will not be a restoration of the Mosaic kingdom.
• Dispensational theology believes that the key to understanding the end is in Israel and modern times. Covenant theology concludes that the key to the end is understanding the work of Christ in its end-time fullness.
• Dispensationalism is not confessional which means they do not hold to the historic confessions. Covenant theology is always following the tradition of reformed confessions.
• Dispensationalism started in 1800’s in America and grew in popularity in 1900’s. Covenant theology started in the 4th century, is developed during the 16th century reformation and becomes fully mature in 17th century.