Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'd recommend Covenants Made Simple by Jonty Rhodes. You can't go wrong with a book that's essentially identical to the title of the thread! I believe Reformed Forum also has a free class on Covenant Theology.
Ah, I didn't notice our brother is a "1689er." In that case, I also would recommend, as a comparative study, Pascal Denault's The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology. It is quite an interesting and informative piece.
This looks good. I am watching the first now. Thanks brother."Baptist Covenant Theology"
This is the best intro to Covenant Theology from a Reformed perspective—no quirks and no controversy.Covenants Made Simple by Jonty Rhodes.
what other perspective could there be?This is the best intro to Covenant Theology from a Reformed perspective—no quirks and no controversy.
Baptist perspectives. 1689 Federalism, Progressive Covenantalism, New Covenant Theology to name a few.what other perspective could there be?
I wouldn’t either. I was just pointing out that there’s a lot more than the reformed perspective on CT.I wouldn't call NCT a Reformed Baptist view
Agreed.I wouldn’t either. I was just pointing out that there’s a lot more than the reformed perspective on CT.
Corrected.what other perspective should there be?
Baptist perspectives. 1689 Federalism, Progressive Covenantalism, New Covenant Theology to name a few.
John Gill didn't hold to 1689 Federalism, James White doesn't either unless he changed his mind. @brandonadams might be able to help clarify.That is a Reformed perspective. The others probably not so much, but then again those other things aren't Covenant Theology.
My definition of reformed must be different than yours. That's fine, I believe 1689 Federalism is a viable option for Baptists. New Covenant Theology is obviously not. I know we can all agree on that.That is a Reformed perspective.
What do either of those comments have to do with anything? John Gill and James White didn't hold to NCT or Progressive Covenantalism either.John Gill didn't hold to 1689 Federalism, James White doesn't either unless he changed his mind. @brandonadams might be able to help clarify.
My definition of reformed must be different than yours.
Thank you brother.I would third Jonty Rhodes' little volume; very concise and helpful. You can also check this out if you like; it's simple but not necessarily concise, 10 lessons on covenant theology in all; but it's also not audio or video: www.ruinandredemption.com
I’m currently reading through Jon’s book, Ruin and Redemption, and can vouch that it is a quality read. I can also vouch that you could finish Covenants made Simple by the time you got through chapter 1 of his book!Thank you brother.
Thank you for your question Sean Patrick Cornell. You wrote, "That is a Reformed perspective" in reference to 1689 Federalism. I mentioned that famous Reformed Baptists like Gill and White do not hold to 1689 Federalism. In the context of the discussion I was trying to point out that Reformed Baptists can hold to another form of Covenant theology not yet mentioned that other form of Covenant theology is express by Nichols.What do either of those comments have to do with anything? John Gill and James White didn't hold to NCT or Progressive Covenantalism either.
I ordered this book and have begun reading it, and have a question. In discussing the covenant of works, Mr. Rhodes says that the agreement or conditions that God made with Adam in the garden were 1. That positively, humans must obey God, fulfilling the "cultural mandate," which Mr. Rhodes defines as pertaining to work, families, marriage, art, sciences. 2. Negatively, they must not take the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.I'd recommend Covenants Made Simple by Jonty Rhodes. You can't go wrong with a book that's essentially identical to the title of the thread! I believe Reformed Forum also has a free class on Covenant Theology.