What do you think?
Rate this book
New Covenant Theology: Description Definition Defense
“Wells does a fine job of analyzing some of the historical and broadly theological issues, while Zaspel concentrates on a careful exegesis of key New Testament texts—especially the pivotal Matthew 5:17-20. The combination is impressive and persuasive. … Their careful biblical argument needs to be taken into account as the task of reforming our traditions in light of the witness of Scripture goes forward.” From the Foreword by Douglas J. Moo
“If there is any hope of a meeting of minds, let alone of a resolution of the issues, it takes time, patience, intellectual humility, a willingness to be corrected, and thoughtful and empathetic listening combined with accurate and understated articulation of each party's understanding. And those are the values of this book. … perhaps, in the mercy of God, we will discover, in time, that some genuine steps have been taken toward theological agreement.” D. A. Carson
“Tom Wells and Fred Zaspel have moved us along the road … of profitable discussion. They have shown unity with their contending brethren on many points while making clear the leading principles of NCT and setting in bold relief some of the major implications of those principles. Some of us who may not agree with all aspects of the position as articulated here, nevertheless hope that this book gains a wide and respectful reading.” Tom Nettles
324 pages, Paperback
First published March 21, 2002
2 people are currently reading
83 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
May 7, 2014
In reading about covenants, one would expect to read a great deal about baptism. But Wells and Zaspel don’t go there at all. Instead, their focus is on the law. But to begin, they focus on hermeneutics. They write about how we must read the Old Testament through the lens of the New. They choose the Mosaic law to show how we ought to understand this perspective.
I have read the reconstructionists for a long while now trying to understand how we ought to apply the Mosaic law, and while I have found them to be brilliant and helpful, their positions just didn’t seem quite right. I’ve always believed that we must read the OT in light of the NT, and only accept the Mosaic law as Christ has given it to us, but I hadn’t fully understood what this meant.
I have found Paul’s metaphor of the law being a tutor instructive, but never fully developed it. Here, Wells and Zaspel helpfully compare the Mosaic Law to a caterpillar and the Law of Christ to a butterfly. Herein lies the secret to applying the Mosaic Law in the Christian age. (p. 157) The Law of Christ could only come to maturity by first being revealed in its infancy. And that is how Israel received it—for the law was their tutor and they could not question it for lack of wisdom. For they were being called into wisdom, and could only receive—they could not perceive the depths of the gift they’d been given.
The two laws are not the same thing, despite their reflection of the God from which they originate. As they write, “the law of Moses, while of divine origin and entirely suitable for its purpose in the older economy, has, in Christ, reached its full measure and eschatological climax.” p. 132
Christians have matured out of the tutelage of the Law of Moses because the law has been written on their hearts and they have the Holy Spirit. “Do they [Christians] need to be told that they must not steal, perjure themselves and commit adultery? Yes. Those are the warnings against gross sin to which I just referred. Their main diet, however, will be something else, encouragement in heart godliness.” p. 179
Yes, the Mosaic Law still informs righteousness. They use several examples to show this—including the much discussed ‘bestiality’ question which is never repeated in the NT. Does this mean that it is “now allowed?” “No, bestiality in the NT is condemned on two grounds. First, in 1 Corinthians 7:2 and Hebrews 13:4; we have explicit prohibition of all sexuality outside the marriage union. Even more to our point, the NT condemns porneia (‘sexual immorality’; e.g., 1 Cor. 6:18), and at this point the interpreter must ask what it is that constitutes porneia. To answer that question we are forced to recognize that for the NT writers porneia is informed by the OT. They had a whole-Bible-hermeneutic, and following their lead so must we.” p. 158
Wells and Zaspel actually engage with Theonomists like Greg Bahnsen which was encouraging. They also refer to Poythress’ work “The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses,” which is very much like their position than Bahnsen’s, but is also very influenced by Bahnsen.
For a book on “New Covenant Theology” I was very disappointed, as they book was really a focus on law. Maybe my understanding of “New Covenant Theology” is wrong, or maybe this is just a reflection of the book being a response to Richard Barcellos’ “In Defense of the Decalogue.” In any case, I was let down that it didn’t deal with baptism, but I was thrilled to discover it deals extensively with the law and affirms Christ as the law giver for all people at all times—a position with which I heartily agree. This is the best understanding of the law that I’ve encountered in all my reading on biblical law.
I have read the reconstructionists for a long while now trying to understand how we ought to apply the Mosaic law, and while I have found them to be brilliant and helpful, their positions just didn’t seem quite right. I’ve always believed that we must read the OT in light of the NT, and only accept the Mosaic law as Christ has given it to us, but I hadn’t fully understood what this meant.
I have found Paul’s metaphor of the law being a tutor instructive, but never fully developed it. Here, Wells and Zaspel helpfully compare the Mosaic Law to a caterpillar and the Law of Christ to a butterfly. Herein lies the secret to applying the Mosaic Law in the Christian age. (p. 157) The Law of Christ could only come to maturity by first being revealed in its infancy. And that is how Israel received it—for the law was their tutor and they could not question it for lack of wisdom. For they were being called into wisdom, and could only receive—they could not perceive the depths of the gift they’d been given.
The two laws are not the same thing, despite their reflection of the God from which they originate. As they write, “the law of Moses, while of divine origin and entirely suitable for its purpose in the older economy, has, in Christ, reached its full measure and eschatological climax.” p. 132
Christians have matured out of the tutelage of the Law of Moses because the law has been written on their hearts and they have the Holy Spirit. “Do they [Christians] need to be told that they must not steal, perjure themselves and commit adultery? Yes. Those are the warnings against gross sin to which I just referred. Their main diet, however, will be something else, encouragement in heart godliness.” p. 179
Yes, the Mosaic Law still informs righteousness. They use several examples to show this—including the much discussed ‘bestiality’ question which is never repeated in the NT. Does this mean that it is “now allowed?” “No, bestiality in the NT is condemned on two grounds. First, in 1 Corinthians 7:2 and Hebrews 13:4; we have explicit prohibition of all sexuality outside the marriage union. Even more to our point, the NT condemns porneia (‘sexual immorality’; e.g., 1 Cor. 6:18), and at this point the interpreter must ask what it is that constitutes porneia. To answer that question we are forced to recognize that for the NT writers porneia is informed by the OT. They had a whole-Bible-hermeneutic, and following their lead so must we.” p. 158
Wells and Zaspel actually engage with Theonomists like Greg Bahnsen which was encouraging. They also refer to Poythress’ work “The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses,” which is very much like their position than Bahnsen’s, but is also very influenced by Bahnsen.
For a book on “New Covenant Theology” I was very disappointed, as they book was really a focus on law. Maybe my understanding of “New Covenant Theology” is wrong, or maybe this is just a reflection of the book being a response to Richard Barcellos’ “In Defense of the Decalogue.” In any case, I was let down that it didn’t deal with baptism, but I was thrilled to discover it deals extensively with the law and affirms Christ as the law giver for all people at all times—a position with which I heartily agree. This is the best understanding of the law that I’ve encountered in all my reading on biblical law.
November 17, 2014
While both authors were very congenial in their approach to the topic and their critics (and they should be commended for such a Christian approach), the subject matter simply does not stand on solid theological ground.
New Covenant Theology seems at best to be for Dispensationalists who secretly want to be Reformed or Covenant Theologians who secretly want to be Dispensationalists - but will accomplish neither for neither.
The problem is that it really doesn’t help at all in bridging the gap between those two theologies (and to be honest, I’m not convinced the gap actually should be bridged). This new theological system actually seems to cause more confusion and create more questions rather than bringing a more helpful understanding of God’s Word to the church.
For my fuller assessment, see my blog.
New Covenant Theology seems at best to be for Dispensationalists who secretly want to be Reformed or Covenant Theologians who secretly want to be Dispensationalists - but will accomplish neither for neither.
The problem is that it really doesn’t help at all in bridging the gap between those two theologies (and to be honest, I’m not convinced the gap actually should be bridged). This new theological system actually seems to cause more confusion and create more questions rather than bringing a more helpful understanding of God’s Word to the church.
For my fuller assessment, see my blog.
November 22, 2013
Description:
This book deals mostly with the relationship between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mount and Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Typology and spiritual fulfillment of promises in the church are largely dealt with also.
Cons:
Strangely, the book ends with a rant against creeds. I have no clue how this adds to Wells's argument for New Covenant Theology. Secondly, Wells does not contrast his view with any other so it is difficult to know exactly what he is writing for/against.
This book deals mostly with the relationship between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mount and Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Typology and spiritual fulfillment of promises in the church are largely dealt with also.
Cons:
Strangely, the book ends with a rant against creeds. I have no clue how this adds to Wells's argument for New Covenant Theology. Secondly, Wells does not contrast his view with any other so it is difficult to know exactly what he is writing for/against.
November 8, 2011
Wells and Zaspel attempt to clarify their views of this new theology construct. Able pastors and writers they seek to show the biblical basis of their thinking in 15 chapters and appendices. Rev. John Reisinger probably preaches it with more passion, but these two give it greater clarity.
November 23, 2013
Took quite a lot to think through the book. I just don't think the case has been made. Although the argument is made that they are not trying to only show that Sabbath keeping has not been continued with the coming of Christ, it seems that the largest part of the book is devoted to that very issue.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews