New Covenant Theology: questions answered

Steve Lehrer's book is a helpful guide to a way of looking at the bible that has come to be called New Covenant Theology. He gives us some directions on how to interpret the bible and answers objections to this understanding of the relationship between the biblical covenants, between the Old and New Testaments and between Israel and the Church.

Lehrer's approach is to interpret the Old Testament in the light of the New. The aphorisms

The New is in the Old contained
The Old is in the New explained

and

The New is in the Old concealed
The Old is in the New revealed

are not quoted in the book, but they are good summaries of the way that the author makes sense of the Scriptures.

Lehrer's way of looking at the bible is in harmony with much of Reformed theology and the Amillennial understanding of how we are to interpret the Old Testament prophecies. This understanding takes seriously the way the New Testament authors have interpreted the Old Testament. Where the NT authors say that a certain prophecy has been fulfilled [such as in the way Peter's sermon in Acts 2 cites the prophecy in Joel chapter 2], Lehrer does not look for another fulfilment.

He goes to considerable trouble to show the distinctive way Israel is viewed in NCT. While Covenant Theologians think of Israel as the Church in the Old Testament, and Dispensationalists think of that nation as a people of God, separate from the Church, Lehrer points out that the Scriptures present Israel as the unbelieving physical symbol of the Church. The counterpart to the church in the Old Testament is the remnant, which is uniformly presented as a small group within Israel, who believe and obey from the heart.

Consistent with this view, is Lehrer's explanation of the meaning of the passage in Romans 11 which speaks of all Israel being saved. He shows convincingly, that the New Testament does not present a future mass salvation of Israel, but tells us that the true Israelite is the one who is a Jew inwardly, as well as physically and ethnically. Thus the passage "and so all Israel will be saved" speaks of all elect Israelites certainly coming to salvation through faith in Christ, and not automatically because they are Jews.

He patiently explains that we cannot divide the Old Testament law neatly into Moral, Civil and Ceremonial divisions, and takes seriously the New Testament's words that the law of Moses has been abolished through the death of Christ, the new divine lawgiver, who has modified and amplified this law and has made it possible for us to obey it, through the Holy Spirit whom he has given to us.

He shows that living by the law of Christ is in no sense antinomian, and shows that this is not a wishy-washy anything-goes way of living, but is rigorous and is guided by the many commands Jesus gives to us both in his own words and in the words of his apostles and writers of the New Testament.

Lehrer does not say much about the fact that most of the Old Covenant's ten commandments are reflected in this new law, but he does clearly show us that Christian living involves much more than "loving God and doing what you will," to quote Augustine.

Lehrer has clearly shown that the Old Testament is intended to give us physical, earthy pictures of what God was going to fulfil spiritually in Jesus and the Church.

While there is a lot of thought-provoking material in this book, I would have liked more development of the place of the Old Testament for the Christian today, but maybe this is the subject for another book.

I heartily recommend reading Lehrer's short account of this satisfying way of synthesising and integrating the bible's message, and hope that the few NCT writings so far written [such as Wells and Zaspel's New Covenant Theology,] will soon be supplemented by whole systematic theologies and commentaries.

Wikipedia

I enjoy using the user-created Wikipedia. It is usually up-to-date and I often find it to be reliable, realising that I am only sampling a tiny proportion of the articles.

Today I read some statistics on Gun deaths in the United States, compared with other countries. The situation has not changed appreciably since I first saw comparative figures about 25 years ago.

So I was surprised to read in the Wikipedia article on Gun Politics in the United States that

Homicide rates as a whole, especially homicides as a result of firearms use, are not always significantly lower in many other developed countries. This is apparent in the UK and Japan, which have very strict gun control.

But these figures for homicides from 1998 show that the article is wrong:

373 people in Germany, 82 million
151 people in Canada, 32 million
57 people in Australia, 20 million
19 people in Japan, 127 million
54 people in England and Wales, 60 million
and
11,789 people in the United States, 300 million

This means that in Japan only .15 people were killed by a gun per million people
while in the UK, nearly 1 person per million died by gun death.
Australia had nearly 3 people per million
Canada and Germany lost nearly 5 people per million
but the United States lost 39 people per million.

These figures do not take into account the thousands who ended their own lives using the guns which are so freely available.

It would be wonderful if someone were to write a more balanced, more factual article for the Wikipedia, but I would guess that such an article would not last long.