Abner Chou on Covenant Theology, Dispensationalism, and Postmillennialism

Comments · 12

• PA

  @PaulSwansonIdAu · 8 months ago

  Things that can only be taken seriously in a Masters safe space.

  12

• BE

  @BenjaminBundy · 9 months ago

  Well stated.

  2

• MR

  @MrYuppyCalvinist · 8 months ago

  Good stuff. I'm a Reformed Baptist, and think Chou is trending in that direction from his answers. I always struggled with Reformed covenantalism, which seems to smooth over things and fit everything nicely into their theological filing cabinets without the hard work of exegesis. However, Dispensationalism was riddled with problems, namely the clear, over-arching structure of covenants in the Bible (as well as the NTs use/hermeneutic of the OT). RB covenantalism is not merely a nice 'via media' for the sake of political correctness, but I think the best Biblical and balanced - and Christ-centered - hermeneutic. A book that helped me early on was Wellum and Gentry's "Kingdom through Covenant." It sounds like Chou (and even MacArthur) is on this trajectory, and I hope he continues to Semper Reformanda, rather than just clutching to Dispensationalism for the sake of not ruffling feathers at the TMS. Thanks for posting!!

  2

• RE

  @redgracemedia118 · 3 weeks ago

  The book of Hebrews gives you the hermeneutic on how to interpret the relationship between old and new revelation. Covenant theology just follows suit. Dispensational hermeneutics refuses to approach the bible canonically and loses the forest for the trees. Even worse, dispensational theology, makes the temporal, symbolic and provisional, the ultimate. So for example, the temple, the land, and the nation of Israel, etc.. instead of the original intent for these provisional things, the dispensationalist absolutizes them. That is the opposite of the principal laid down in the book of Hebrews.

  4

• PH

  @philtheo · 9 months ago

  Hm, I respect and love Abner Chou, but I think how he characterizes covenantalism as a "top-down" and "philosophical" methodology and dispensationalism as a "bottom-up" and "inductive" methodology isn't entirely fair to covenantalism. The fact is that both covenantalism and dispensationalism would claim that they have derived their respective systems from a "bottom-up" and "inductive" study of Scripture itself. Whether or not that is actually the case in either covenantalism or dispensationalism is where the real debate is, but again the fact of the matter is that both would claim that they believe what they believe fundamentally because of what they see taught in the Bible, not because they've foisted a foreign "top-down" "philosophical" methodology onto Scripture.

  3

• ME

  @Mercheri9 · 5 months ago

  this is a gross misrepresentation of covenant theology

  4

• SO

  @someguywithastrat · 8 months ago

  Covenant theology is a top-down philosophical system. The Bible never says the terms covenant of redemption, covenant of works, and covenant of grace. Obviously the clear bottom up reading of Scripture is 7 dispensations of innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and kingdom. You know. Cause that’s not a philosophical imposition

  3