Who Said That?

Who said that?

"We have discovered some interesting facts about covenant theology. . . . Its origin was relatively recent.  It was not the doctrinal system of the ancient church.  It did not originate with the Reformers, and actually its present form is a modification of the original covenant idea proposed by Cocceius and the Westminster Confession. . . . The theological covenants on which covenant theology is based are not specifically revealed in Scripture.  Other covenants (such as the Abrahamic and Davidic) are specifically revealed, and in great detail, but the all-embracing covenants of covenant theology are not in the Bible.  The whole covenant system is based on a deduction and not the results of an inductive study of Scripture."

You guys know the rules.  The fun is in the guessing . . . not in google searching and spoiling it for everyone else!  Place your guess in the comments section.

Update on Monday, November 27, 2006 at 01:55PM by Kim Riddlebarger

As many of you guessed, this comes from Charles Ryrie's book, Dispensationalism (Moody Press, 1995, p. 193).  The next generation of dispensationalists need to interact with people like Mike Horton and his book, God of Promise.  The argument that these covenants (works and grace) are not in the Bible, simply doesn't fly any more.

Comments

[sixzandsevenz]

Sounds like Johnny Mac

[Sonja]

That sounds a lot like Chuck Missler.

[Mark]

I'll second what sixzandsevenz said... I think it is John MacArthur.

[walt]

I just talked to a recent grad of the Master's seminary who said virtually the same thing. I'm going to say John MacArthur.

[BrianR]

Dave Hunt?

[Wayne Rohde]

John Walvoord?

Or Dwight Penecost or Charles Ryrie?

Sounds almost identical to something Walvoord wrote, but given the wording with which it's introduced, and the propensity of dispys to quote each other, I'm betting it's someone down the line (Ice? Demy? LaHaye? Hunt?).

Dispys just can't get past the fact that their system goes back to Darby in the 1830s and dead ends there. So, instead of exegeting Scripture, it's just "proof text away" and "label everything else as recent too" (despite the creeds, the Reformers, etc.). So whoever said it, it's the classic D mode of operation. Pretty standard operating procedure.

[Joel Nelson]

Scofield

[Andrew Alvarez]

Chuck Missler, I think.

[Jon]

I know that Ryrie spends some time on this in "Dispensationalism Today", however I don't think he drops the WCF terminology on his readers...

It pains me to read such propaganda as it reminds me so much of the teaching I received as a child. :-(

["lee n. field"]

"we have discovered"

Izzat what they call "plural of majesty"?

[Richard]

Sounds like Dave Hunt.

[Chris Sherman]

It sounds like Chuck Smith, maybe.

[Robin]

It's got to be a Federal Vision guy.

It sounds too tame to be Doug Wilson. Maybe Mr. Wright? (Gotta wonder if they ever read Galations or Hebrews.) But then NT Wright thinks Paul didn't know what he was talking about. Go figure....

Robin

[turmeric]

Nah, it's a Dispy. Who else would care if you use inductive or deductive methods? It's Johny Mac - no other popular dispy knows as much about covenant theology, and it's not mean enough to be Hunt.

[John D. Chitty]

House or Ice?

[Frank]

It sounds like Charles Ryrie in "Dispensationalism Today".

[Keith Conley]

It can't be NT Wright or the NPP. They have a CT, even if it is a retarded version of it.

Best guess is MacArthur.

[Frank]

In "Dispensationalism Today" Ryrie practically quotes the paragraph. He does change a few words. If Ryrie said it, I don't think it is in this book.

[DSY]

Sounds A LOT like Benny Hinn.

DSY

[John Davis]

Dr Lewis Sperry Chafer