Does adherence to Covenant theology necessitate social implications distinct from adherence to Dispensational theology? If there are I would think that they would necessarily be distinct from any particular eschatological position on the Covenant side since adherence to Covenant Theology does not necessitate any particular eschatological position. So the answer would not be tied to an individual eschatological position.

What are your thoughts?

__________________
Benjamin
FPCNA
Indianapolis, IN

All the endes of the worlde shall remember themselues,
and turne to the Lord: and all the kinreds of the nations
shall worship before thee. For the kingdome is the Lords,
and he ruleth among the nations. Psalm 22:27-28

Gary North's book Rapture Fever argues that it does.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

Dispensationalism goes Israel crazy and is often pessimistic.

Many CTers are amil or postmil and see that Jesus will reign wher'er the sun, in its successive journeys run....

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

So what are the social implications? Try to keep it out of the realm of eschatology as hard as it may be. Thanks for the replies!

Israel crazy IS a social implication, it affects US foreign policy. Also pessimism is also quite a social thing too.

Some of the most pessimistic people I've ever known have been amils.

__________________
Chris Poe--Attending Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA

"There never was a man in the world without a creed. What is a creed? A creed is what you believe. What is a confession? It is a declaration of what you believe. That declaration may be oral or it may be committed to writing, but the creed is there either expressed or implied."—B.H. Carroll

Click to get: Board Rules--Signature Requirements--Suggestions?

In my kind of on-going journey away from dispensationalism, I've come to see where there is at least a subtle difference. A covenantal view emphasizes God's work throughout history in redeeming a people for Himself and for His glory. It also sees Christ reigning right now as opposed to an exclusively, or practically exclusively, future reign in a Jewish millennial kingdom. In dispensationalism, the purpose of God's kingdom, in the future, is primarily to fulfill His promises to the nation of Israel. In covenantalism, the purpose of God's kingdom, now and in the future, is to display His glory to and through His people.
With these different perspectives, I think covenantalism puts more emphasis on living out the implications of the gospel in every realm of life, in order to display God's glory and power in this present world. Dispensationalists often focus on simply "winning souls" who will be blessed in a future kingdom. I see the covenantal approach as being more "holistic" in respect to the application of the truths of the gospel.
These distinctions apply more directly to full-orbed, traditional dispensationalism. The progressives have made a definite shift toward recognizing the presence of the kingdom of God in the church in this age. The last chapter of "Progressive Dispensationalism" by Blaising and Bock touches on the social implications of their view of the kingdom as having been inaugurated in Christ.
My perspective on it anyway.

__________________
Mike Shingler
Pastor: Steep Hollow Baptist Church (SBC)
Bryan, TX

Part of me has wondered with the Dispensationalist's severing of the continuity between the OT church and the NT church, if it starts running in the direction of radical individuality because it takes believers out of the covenant community of God. Maybe I'm off on this - please correct me if I am!

__________________
Jacob
Sovereign Grace Ministries
Covenant Fellowship Church
West Chester, PA

"Grace renews nature; glory perfects grace." ~ John Owen
Blog - The Strasbourg Inn

Dispensational theology creates a secular/sacred distinction. This is everything with the church is "sacred" and anything done outside the church is "secular". The problem is they compartmentalize the role of the Christian in society and place unecessary burdens on people. Those who are "truly" spiritual will be sold out for the Lord and will become pastors, evangelists, or missionaries. This results in binding peoples conscience where scripture doesn't require it. The societal break down occurs when people are not taught what their biblical roles are and what it means to be a Christian in society. The Biblical role of a Christian in society is this.

Leading a quiet life, minding one's own business, providing for your family, maintaining a peaceable witness, and being content with one's position in life is not enough within DT. DT proponents emphasize one must constantly be serving in the church which results in a works oriented justification. One is justified by the amount of "serving" they are doing in the church. The societal break down occurs because people are so pressured to "serve" in the church thus neglecting their responsibilities as husbands, fathers, mothers, employees, and employers. When we walk in our God given and commanded roles that are in scripture Christians will truly be salt and light in the world.

__________________
John J.
Member Christ Prebyterian Church (OPC)
Salt Lake City, Utah
www.christpres.net

I would have to say that my experience with DT would indicate that DT tends towards this.

There is a constant "works nature" even if you don't believe in salvation by works as a dispy. Dispies I know have this constant thought of "if I had only"...as though a person was saved or not saved because THEY did or did not say something at a particular time. It's either self lifting to self defeating...the latter mostly.

I don't know who all is amil vs postmil, but I was familiar with some that were VERY vocal about amil and they were very negative. This doesn't mean that all are though. I'm certain I would be surprised.

__________________
JC
URCNA
PA

"Forgiveness is primarily for our own sake, so that we no longer carry the burden of resentment. But to forgive does not mean we will allow injustice again." --Jack Kornfield

Social implications? IMHO dispensationalists from the fundie camp usually swallow certain political Kool-Aide without asking questions. Since dispensationalism is often akin to Arminianism, you are more likely to encounter a dispensationalist giving you a Chick Tract while walking down the street or find one left in a public restroom. While CT's can be just as conservative as dispensationalists, the former can be found on both ends of the political spectrum - libetarian or liberal. You're less likely to encounter a CT "forcing" their faith on you. There's crossover in many areas.

__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Grace Baptist Church
Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Deo volente

A lot of dispies tend to be focused on evangelism or "soul winning" to the point that social responsibilities, including family responsibilities, get overlooked or at least slighted. I see this, especially, with regard to my concern for the state of the biblical family in the church today. Pragmatism in winning people to the Lord trumps other areas of biblical obedience and commitment. For example, the most common argument I've heard from my dispensational friends and acquaintances who are negative toward homeschooling is, "How will we be salt and light in the world? Who's going to witness to the lost kids in public schools if all the Christians remove their kids from schools?" That argument, as I see, grows out of a mindset that sees evangelism as almost the sole responsibility of the church in the world.
I heard that dispensational view explained this way recently, "They are just concerned about getting souls saved and tossing them in the basket one by one, but aren't real concerned about what's going on in the basket."

Adherence to a fully developed eschatological position is not mandated in Covenant Theology, but it is implicit - just as it is in Dispensationalism. I don't see how one can really discuss it without understanding the eschatological implications inherent in either position.

__________________
Thomas Weddle
Member, Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church
Evansville, Indiana

I understand why some would come away with the impression postulated in these first two paragraphs. This is indeed a huge problem within dispensationalism. However, we need to be careful to separate observable practice from perspectives that are necessarily inherent in a DT. Dispensationalists, by definition, see all creation and history as focused on the glory of God. And not all dispensationalists see the current political entity that is called Israel as having any eschatological significance; though I am almost certain all of them would see it as some sort of possibility - especially in the future.
This carries over into every aspect of life, including holy living verses "winning souls." There are many PCUSA churches that don't seem that focused on God's glory, for instance. I don't know if they're truly Covenantalists. But they're not dispies. How does this reconcile with the idea that differing social implications are necessarily inherent in either system?
Much of the problem is the nebulous nature of dispensationalism. Distilled down to it's basic tenets, it is non-stereotypical in regard to holy living or social order. It's a matter of how that works itself out; whether one is focused on God, His sovereignty and His glory. Many disp. churches and cov. churches alike focus on programs and works rather than on the necessity of the Lord building and maintaining the house. Either He is the author and finisher or not; and we all know the answer to this.
Theonomy would have another implication here. Dispensationalists are decidedly not theonomists. So, with that consideration, there could be a necessarily different implication in regard to different theological perspectives.
The severing of continuity CAN engender individuality, but that is more of a cultural distinctive than anything inherent in the theological system. Americans, for instance, are individualistic and embrace the illusion of self-sufficiency to a fault. This is apparent in all denominations and systems throughout the country - even the ones who call themselves covenantal and yet live with an "us four and no more" complex.
The vision of the leadership in regard to the community nature of the church, instilling a deep understanding of the body of Christ and both our need and contribution does not depend upon a system either. It depends on a solid understanding of what Jesus has provided in the institution and building of His church, and our place in His body.
Neither is the idea of distinguishing "sacred" and "secular" inherent in DT. It is a byproduct of bad teaching. But not necessarily part and parcel of DT. Again, it's a matter of teaching. A man's calling is a sacred calling, regardless of his station in life. We are to do all things to the glory of God. Unless the Lord is the builder, then all work is in vain. These things fit within DT well, but can be easily overlooked as many put man in the center of life, making Jesus a part of their lives rather than Lord of their lives (as was made abundantly clear by the book written by a well known dispensationalist - The Gospel According to Jesus). No system has the monopoly on that tendency.
The idea of believing in God's sovereignty and yet living as practical arminians is also a tendency among men, not just dispies. We all second guess ourselves and desire to say things in a manner that will best challenge consciences for God's glory. But I have to say that teaching that God is sovereign can help one overcome wrong thinking and depend on God as they ought to. We have to be careful not to equate DT with Arminianism. They walk hand in hand by habit, but not systematic necessity.
This quote is an excellent example.It is true that many dispensational churches are doing this. It is an abomination. But this is more inherent in the easy believism and Finneyism of cultural Christianity than anything directly related to DT. Just like the eschatological sensationalists, people take a piece of the pie and make a whole meal out of it. But, again, we must be careful not to take an example and make it a necessary result of a system. Any system can be abused, as is evident in NPP, FV and Open Theism, among others.
The important eschatological event, after the cross, is the return of Jesus, regardless of one's position. Except for a few here, I assume that we all look forward to His return. And, regardless of a/post/or premill we see the return of Christ as fulfillment of His promises to His people. I can't see how the differences could necessitate social implications. It's the manner in which one adheres to the mandate of God's Word, seeking Him first, that will determine one's influence on society.

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Married up in 1988 and blessed with two wonderful sons
TMS graduate
Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI
http://www.SoundLife.org

The thing that gets me about the whole public school issue and being "salt and light" is that the dispensationalists have no clue of reality on this matter.

The average adult in the pew is ignorant about evangelism and apologetics and how to debate with non-believers.

Do the dispys really believe then that their 5-17 old children are going to make bold, knowledgeable stands in the classrooms and in the cafeteria? The fact of the matter is that they are not, and they have no clue how to do so. Their churches are guilty of not even remotely equipping them to do so. Have you seen youth "ministries" today? An absolute joke, almost all of them are primarily nothing more than entertainment.

So, in addressing the original question of the thread, yes, there is a huge difference between dispensational and covenantal social implications. A true covenant view does have a full-orbed world and life perspective on all things, because Jesus is Lord over everything - not just private, personal hearts and minds and Bible study groups. Dispys postponed Christ's lordship until their precious, literal 1000 year reign outside of Jerusalem commences.

Until then - sit back, relax, and wait for the rapture - which will occur "someday" soon. All social and political things, of course, slowly decay in the meantime and eventually collapse. Kind of where we are now.

__________________
Randy Harris
Heritage Church (Independent)
Oklahoma City, OK

I see this alot in my current neck of the woods.

__________________
Jeff Rod
Eastwood Presbyterian Church PCA
member.
webpage: myspace.com/reformationforever

To live a simple, peaceable life before God
To owe as little as possible, to few as possible.

I think one of the big problems I see is that DT's do not see the huge role that family plays in salvation. DT's tend to be individualistic to a fault. I guess what I am saying is that when you do not look at the bible through the lense of covenant you really miss that the primary means that God uses to bring faith to the individual is through the family, the primary means to preserve faith is through the family, the primary means to reform the nations is through the family. That's a big drawback. Go to most any DT church and you see a disconect in this area(this has been the case in my experience, I have been corrected on this point, it is not the case in all DT churches). Segregated sunday school, worship, and activities are the norm. Parents rush there kids to the nurseries and classes so they can run off and have their own personal worship and discipleship time.

__________________
Paul W.
Ordained Pastor, SBC
Girard, Illinois

My blog: A Pilgrim's Ponderings Wife's blog: Grace in Bloom