How is all of Scripture for us? Aren’t we “not under the Law”? If so, how are we to think of the moral laws in the OT that are not repeated in the New? Some argue that Christians are not under the civil and ceremonial elements of Mosaic Law but that we continue to remain under the moral commands. Though such a conclusion feels right, the problem is that Scripture does not present a threefold distinction within the Law. Given the fact, who decides which is which? In fact, what we consider moral and civil and ceremonial are all found in the same sections of Law. Rather, it appears that the Christian is not under the Mosaic Law in its totality. This is the argument of Progressive Covenantalism. But does this not result in antinomianism? Wouldn’t it mean that Christians are lawless? Stephen Wellum wants to argue that, against some critics, Progressive Covenantalists hold that “Scripture’s ethical teaching is consistent across the canon because it is grounded in God’s unchanging nature and will” (p215). Over five steps, Wellum presents a Progressive Covenantal biblical basis for ethics:
Tag: stephen wellum
The battle between Covenant Theology (CT) and Dispensational Theology (DT) is notoriously intense and shows no signs of calming down. Over time, however, the emergence of mediating positions has blurred the sharp distinction. On such “via media” is dubbed Progressive Covenantalism, first articulated in Kingdom Through Covenant (KTC). This new book, Progressive Covenantalism, is considered “a continuation of KTC” (p4) by consisting of essays collected from like-minded scholars that address issues “underdeveloped and not discussed” (p4) in KTC.