Mediating Between Dispensational and Covenant Theologies

Walter C. Kaiser, Jr's The Promise-Plan of God: A Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments (Zondervan, 2008) is a revision and expansion of his Toward an Old Testament Theology (Zondervan, 1978). The introduction to this volume is brand new and replaces the introduction to TaOTT. Kaiser address the values and liabilities of both Dispensational and Covenantal systems of theology, especially "how each decides if there exists one or two 'people(s) of God' (i.e., Israel and the church) and one or two 'program(s) of God' (i.e., a single redemptive-historical program or an earthly and a heavenly program for Israel and the church)" (p. 26). His purpose in the present book is to argue for what he believes to be the unifying theme of the whole Bible. In doing so, it is necessary that he address these two major evangelical systems of Biblical interpretation.

As I first read through this section, I must admit that I feared that Kaiser presented each view in strokes that were far to broad. I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and tried to assume that he had presented each system in general terms due to space constraints, but after a third round I am certain that this section is designed to suit Kaiser’s purposes more than it gives either system a fair shake.

His presentation of Covenant (Reformed) Theology is reductionistic and outdated. Some may hold to this position, but it, as Kaiser states, is “an older view” (p. 26). What benefit is there in setting up one’s view by presenting an old, and admittedly faulty view? A quick read through contemporary, Reformed scholarship will prove ably that the bilateral view of the Abrahamic covenant has been soundly refuted. At that, although the “older view” emphasized covenant as a unifying theme of Scripture, Reformed scholarship has found better unifying themes, such as Yahweh, Holiness, the sovereignty of God, the glory of God, the kingdom of God, Jesus Christ, and a combination of the kingdom of God and His glory (see Bruce Waltke’s An Old Testament Theology and Gerard Van Gronigen’s Biblical Theology: Audio Transcription of Lesson 2: Biblical Theology, II). Also, “the older view” necessarily saw God as being completely finished with Israel as a nation, but some contemporary, Reformed scholars have carefully rethought that position. Kaiser has simply framed his argument with broad enough strokes to make his case look even better. This is irksome for two reasons: 1) a textbook should present opposing views as adequately and fairly as the author is able and I can’t imagine that Kaiser is unaware of the most current theological views held in Reformed circles; and 2) Kaiser approaches the subject of Biblical Theology from a very strong, exegetical position and with a desire to not be enslaved to a theological system, and I think that his presentation of “promise-plan” is fantastic. I think that he could easily make his case in light of the contemporary, Reformed positions, but the reader is left to work this out on his/her own.

Next, Kaiser presents the Dispensational position but limits the discussion to the traditional/classical view. Granted, many still cling to this paradigm, but many advances have been made among Dispensationalists with respect to the “two peoples of God” and the “two programs of God” issues.

Kaiser frames his position in the way that he does to show how viable an alternative there is in tracing the theme of promise throughout the Bible. As Kaiser presents his mediating position he seeks to correct the former “solutions of the relationship of Israel and the Christian church” (p. 27). First, once you come to see that the covenant with Israel is, in fact, unilateral and unconditional the term promise best describes the situation. Second, the basis of promise is necessarily that of grace. Kaiser’s view holds that “there is only one ‘people of God’ (even though there may be numerous aspects of that same singular group) and there is only one ‘program of God’ (again, with several aspects all within that one umbrella term)” (p. 27).

Later in this Introduction (p. 30) Kaiser tips his hat to Progressive Dispensationalism, but he avoids interacting with this view. If time permits for this volume to be revised, I wish to see this Introduction expanded to deal with contemporary scholarship.

Mediating Between Dispensational and Covenant Theologies