Is NCT Antinomian?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
Is New Covenant Theology antinomian for denying the fourth commandment?
 

A5pointer

Puritan Board Sophomore
Antinomian would be agianst "law" or "lawless", NCT is not antinomian just says that the Law of Christ has succeeded the Law given by Moses.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
This is really an old debate between 1689 subscribing Reformed Baptists and what used to be called "Sovereign Grace" Baptists, the latter of which denied that we are obligated to observe the sabbath. Many of the Sovereign Grace people have now adopted some form of NCT.

What I find curious is the number of those Baptists who say they hold to CT but are non Sabbatarian.
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
What I find curious is the number of those Baptists who say they hold to CT but are non Sabbatarian.
Isn't Baptist CT and Presbyterian CT different with Baptism being one demonstration of that difference? I'll have to go back to my Peter Masters sermons on this subject but I always thought they were different.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
Just as there are different shades of Covenant Theology, so are there with NCT. For example, I would say that my Church (while myself being Covenantal) is more along the lines of Continental Reformed in that they say the 4th Commandment was mostly spiritual (with which I disagree); however, my church would still reconize the decalogue as being binding.
Are you simply disagreeing with your church or do you also disagree that there is as much disagreement with the Continental and British views as many suppose? If I'm not mistaken, I think there are a good many on this board and elsewhere who will argue that there is no essential difference between the Continental and British (WCF) views, although the Continental confessions do not spell things out quite as clearly as do the Westminster Standards.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
What I find curious is the number of those Baptists who say they hold to CT but are non Sabbatarian.
Isn't Baptist CT and Presbyterian CT different with Baptism being one demonstration of that difference? I'll have to go back to my Peter Masters sermons on this subject but I always thought they were different.
They are, but they are agreed on one covenant of grace, two administrations and the continuance of the Moral Law. The London Confession is just as Sabbatarian as the WCF is. Reformed Baptists routinely denounce NCT and similar views as antinomian, and typically it comes down to an argument over the 4th Commandment since there is generally no argument about the others unless it is argued that there is a New Covenant legal code, as some NCTers have claimed.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
Just as there are different shades of Covenant Theology, so are there with NCT. For example, I would say that my Church (while myself being Covenantal) is more along the lines of Continental Reformed in that they say the 4th Commandment was mostly spiritual (with which I disagree); however, my church would still reconize the decalogue as being binding.
Are you simply disagreeing with your church or do you also disagree that there is as much disagreement with the Continental and British views as many suppose? If I'm not mistaken, I think there are a good many on this board and elsewhere who will argue that there is no essential difference between the Continental and British (WCF) views, although the Continental confessions do not spell things out quite as clearly as do the Westminster Standards.
I'm saying I disagree with the position my church takes on the Sabbath. Of course, I don't make this a bone of contention, so as to avoid making a stink in the church.
:up:
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
Do most Continental Reformed Churches hold to the spiritual view or have they imported the mostly imported the idea from Presbyterianism? Is the Continental view closer to Calvin's view then the Presbyterian view?

Thanks.
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
What I have a problem with, and what NCT (by implication) purports is that somehow Jesus brought a law that was new or better? The problem with that, though, is that God's Law can't get any better than perfect (Ps. 19, et al).
Would that be Baxter's view as well?
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
Do most Continental Reformed Churches hold to the spiritual view or have they imported the mostly imported the idea from Presbyterianism? Is the Continental view closer to Calvin's view then the Presbyterian view?

Thanks.
See the link I posted above.

I don't think there is as much of a difference between the Continental view and the WCF, especially on a practical and historical level, as some want to think. I have known of people who claimed to take the Continental view but were practically as anti-sabbatarian as the average dispensationalist.
 

JohnTombes

Puritan Board Freshman
Neonomianism is the technical term for advocates of a 'New Law.' Baxter was neo-nomian. If he is in heaven, he knows better, now.

There are implications for the Christian life, as well. The third use of the Law is thrown out. They believe (generalization alert) that the Spirit guides believers to know intuitively what they ought to or ought not to do. As regards relationships, love is to govern.

However, the standard of love is the Law--towards God and towards neighbor. Anything in its place is 'anti' nomian. Anti means in the place of as well as against a thing.

Mike
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
What I find curious is the number of those Baptists who say they hold to CT but are non Sabbatarian.
Yeah. To quote O Brother, Where Art Thou?

THAT DON'T MAKE NO SENSE!
Would it follow that Sabbatarian Baptists should give up their credo position and Baptist children of believers?

Just thinking...
That's probably a thought for another thread.

What I was referring to is those who say they hold to the Covenant Theology found in the 2nd London Baptist Confession and other similar statements yet are not sabbatarian. But you have those like some Klineans in Confessional Presbyterian churches that have similar views on the sabbath and who disagree with the WCF.
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
Ok, I better step out and take a day or two to view the links/sermons posted.

Thanks folks.

j
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
What I have a problem with, and what NCT (by implication) purports is that somehow Jesus brought a law that was new or better? The problem with that, though, is that God's Law can't get any better than perfect (Ps. 19, et al).
A former pastor of mine basically identifies with NCT but yet says there is no New Testament legal code and says others go too far in trying to get rid of the Ten Commandments. It's all very confusing, really. NCT is by no means monolithic.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
What I find curious is the number of those Baptists who say they hold to CT but are non Sabbatarian.
Yeah. To quote O Brother, Where Art Thou?

THAT DON'T MAKE NO SENSE!
What I'm interested in finding out is how they get to that point. The people I had in mind when I posted that may now be sabbatarian for all I know.

Of course you have different flavors of sabbatarianism as well. Many will agree with the WCF that there is a continuing sabbath obligation but will differ on some of the particulars.
 

Pilgrim

Puritan Board Doctor
What are some of the flavours of sabbaterianism?
For example, R.C. Sproul has written that he believes that recreation is permissible on the Sabbath. Some who are sabbatarians don't necessarily agree with every jot and tittle of what the Westminster Larger Catechism has to say about it.
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
Ahhhh, I remember reading about that.

Quote from Dr. Sproul: This group of Christians who believe the Sabbath should be observed actually splits into two groups. One holds what we call the Continental view: Recreation is permitted on the Sabbath. The other holds the Puritan view: Recreation is forbidden on the Sabbath. I take the position that recreation is a legitimate form of rest on the Sabbath.
Ligonier Ministries | Questions Answered
 
Last edited:

VaughanRSmith

Puritan Board Sophomore
I attend a college which is heavily influenced by the Carsonesque NCT. I'm looking forward to grappling with it over the next few years.
 

holyfool33

Puritan Board Freshman
I would say no John Reisinger wrote an open letter to R.C. Sproul on this subject and Tom Wells wrote another good article called Is John G. Reisinger an Antinomian?

here's links to both

An Open Letter to R.C. Sproul: openletterrc
Is John G. Reisinger an Antinomian?: jgr_tomwells
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
What are some of the flavours of sabbaterianism?
For example, R.C. Sproul has written that he believes that recreation is permissible on the Sabbath. Some who are sabbatarians don't necessarily agree with every jot and tittle of what the Westminster Larger Catechism has to say about it.
The recreation exception is not to some jot and tittle; it is a distinguishing mark of Puritan Sabbatarianism. :2cents:
 

AV1611

Puritan Board Senior
Ahhhh, I remember reading about that.

Quote from Dr. Sproul: This group of Christians who believe the Sabbath should be observed actually splits into two groups. One holds what we call the Continental view: Recreation is permitted on the Sabbath. The other holds the Puritan view: Recreation is forbidden on the Sabbath. I take the position that recreation is a legitimate form of rest on the Sabbath.
Ligonier Ministries | Questions Answered
The distinction is but a dream. As far as I can discern there was no major difference between the Continental and British view.
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
See previous threads (the first is the longest):
http://www.puritanboard.com/f25/observance-sunday-matter-christian-liberty-26896/
http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/continental-puritan-views-sabbath-5970/
http://www.puritanboard.com/f25/should-my-business-open-sundays-7568/

If it were only that easy, to dismiss it as a dream...
Ahhhh, I remember reading about that.

Quote from Dr. Sproul: This group of Christians who believe the Sabbath should be observed actually splits into two groups. One holds what we call the Continental view: Recreation is permitted on the Sabbath. The other holds the Puritan view: Recreation is forbidden on the Sabbath. I take the position that recreation is a legitimate form of rest on the Sabbath.
Ligonier Ministries | Questions Answered
The distinction is but a dream. As far as I can discern there was no major difference between the Continental and British view.
 

JM

Puritan Board Doctor
Thank you Chris, I understand there to be "doctrinal differences in Calvin's (the real continental view) and that of the Puritans..." and "Theologians such as Voetius and Cocceius had argued for quite some time about the nature of the Sabbath, and thus the Reformed churches were still divided."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top