This article maps major interpretations of the New Covenant, first within dispensationalism and then across non-dispensational traditions. The goal is not to erase real nuances, but to provide a quick orientation to the main claims and representative names most often associated with each view.
Why Are There Different Views on the New Covenant within Dispensationalism?
Scripture contains some themes that are presented in tension. For example, the Kingdom of God appears in some texts as a present reality and in others as a future hope, which gives rise to different views on the subject. The New Covenant likewise involves a tension that must be reckoned with. There are two strands of biblical evidence that need to be harmonized:
- Strand 1. In the Old Testament, the New Covenant is prophesied within the context of Israel's national restoration and is explicitly made with the houses of Israel and Judah (Jer 31:31–34; 32:36–41; Ezek 36:24–28; 37:21–28; Isa 59:20–21).
- Strand 2. In the New Testament, the Church — which also includes Gentiles — appears connected to the New Covenant in several passages (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:6–13; 9:15; 12:24; Eph 2:11–13; 3:6).
It is essential to recognize that both classes of texts are genuinely present in Scripture. The diversity of views within dispensationalism arises precisely from the different ways interpreters attempt to integrate these two strands. Several proposals have emerged within the system:
Proposal 1 — Two New Covenants. Since neither strand can be denied (the Church's relation to the New Covenant in Strand 2, nor the covenant being made with Israel in Strand 1), this view holds that the New Covenant mentioned in the New Testament, in which the Church participates, is distinct from the New Covenant prophesied in the Old Testament. The tension dissolves because the covenant of Strand 1 and the covenant of Strand 2 are simply not the same covenant.
Proposal 2 — A New Covenant exclusively with Israel. Because Strand 1 is undeniable, this view questions Strand 2. While the New Testament appears to associate the Church with the New Covenant, closer exegesis reveals no actual covenantal connection. That appearance arises because the Church is united to Jesus Christ, who is also the mediator of the New Covenant for Israel. The benefits the Church enjoys resemble those of the New Covenant — because they flow from the same sacrifice — but they are not identical. The Church has no relationship whatsoever with the New Covenant or its proper blessings.
Proposal 3 — Indirect participation in New Covenant blessings. Both strands are accepted as undeniable. According to Strand 1, only Israel relates directly to the New Covenant, and only Israel can be under it. According to Strand 2, however, the Church participates indirectly — without being under the covenant itself — through her union with Christ, partaking of genuine New Covenant blessings. The Church truly receives these benefits, not because she is under the covenant or fulfilling it, but only indirectly by virtue of being in Christ. The New Covenant has not yet been formally inaugurated, yet we already enjoy its benefits in this mediated way.
Proposal 4 — Progressive revelation and Gentile inclusion. The Old Testament does indeed prophesy the New Covenant within the context of national restoration for the houses of Israel and Judah. However, the New Testament advances and complements that revelation: through Christ, Gentiles — who were once strangers to the covenants of promise — now become fellow heirs with Israel of those covenants, including the New Covenant. This new revelation is called a mystery by Paul. Thus, Gentiles share in the New Covenant itself and in its benefits. On this view, we can already speak of a partial and initial inauguration of the New Covenant that is now in effect, and the Church can rightly be said to be under it.
Dispensational Views of the New Covenant
The table below summarizes how these proposals map onto the main positions held within dispensationalism, together with representative authors for each.
| View | Core claim | Authors / scholars |
|---|---|---|
| Israel only / no legal participation | The Church is not under the New Covenant and does not receive its benefits, only similar blessings. | Roy E. Beacham, Christopher Cone, George Gunn, Gary Gilley, David Gunn, Charlie Clough, Don Trest, John R. Master, Mark Snoeberger |
| Two New Covenants | Israel and the Church each have their own New Covenant. | Lewis Sperry Chafer, John F. Walvoord (earlier), Charles C. Ryrie (earlier) |
| Church participates in blessings, not in the covenant | The Church receives New Covenant blessings now, but is not under the New Covenant, since it was made exclusively with Israel and will be fulfilled with Israel. | J. N. Darby, C. I. Scofield, J. Dwight Pentecost, Mal Couch, Paul Benware, Charles Feinberg, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Thomas Ice, Homer A. Kent Jr., Phillip Heideman, John F. Walvoord (later) |
| Ratified now, inaugurated with Israel later | The New Covenant is ratified now; the Church benefits now, but its inauguration is future and belongs to Israel. The Church is not under the New Covenant. | Elliott E. Johnson, Stephen R. Lewis |
| Inaugurated New Covenant / partial fulfillment | The Church is already under the inaugurated New Covenant; Israel's full fulfillment is still future. | Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, Robert L. Saucy, Bruce Ware, Michael Vlach, Rodney Decker, Harold Hoehner, Paul Henebury |
Non-Dispensational Views
| View | Core claim | Authors / scholars |
|---|---|---|
| Restated Mosaic | Jeremiah 31 does not establish a distinct New Covenant; it is a reformulation of the Mosaic covenant. | Couturier, Duhm, Schmidt |
| Amillennialism | The Church is the true Israel and heir of the promises of the New Covenant. | Louis Berkhof, William Cox, Anthony Hoekema, O. Palmer Robertson |
| Postmillennialism | The New Covenant was inaugurated in Christ; the gospel will progressively triumph before the Second Coming. Some also expect a future large-scale conversion of the Jews. | Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge, B. B. Warfield, Kenneth Gentry, J. Marcellus Kik, Loraine Boettner |
| Historic Premillennialism | The Church participates in the New Covenant now; there will be a future consummation in a millennial kingdom. | George Eldon Ladd, Henry Alford, J. Barton Payne |
| Covenant Theology (Reformed) | The New Covenant is the final administration of the one Covenant of Grace. The Church is the continuation of Israel. | John Calvin, Michael Horton, R. Scott Clark |
| New Covenant Theology (NCT) | The whole Mosaic law is fulfilled and replaced by the law of Christ. The Church fulfills the typological role of Israel. | Tom Wells, Fred Zaspel, John Reisinger, Steve Lehrer, Jon Zens, Gary Long |
| Progressive Covenantalism | The biblical covenants culminate progressively in Christ and in the New Covenant. It presents itself as an alternative to both Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. | Stephen Wellum, Peter Gentry, Brent Parker, Jason DeRouchie |
FreeRequest: Matthew 24:4–31 — Chronology in Dispensationalism
The chronological view of more than 60 dispensational authors on Matthew 24 — request it by email below.
Enter your email and we will send the PDF as an attachment. See our privacy policy.
Author
Leonardo A. Costa
A researcher and writer exploring dispensationalism from a progressive perspective, with a deep appreciation for the tradition's heritage.
Related Articles
Belonging to the Church in Dispensationalism: The Before and After of Ephesians 2-3
A dispensational reading of Ephesians 2-3 showing how Gentile believers move from alienation to participation in the covenants of promise.
Can the Church Be Unrelated to the New Covenant? A Response to Christopher Cone
A point-by-point response to Christopher Cone's SCIO New Covenant view: 2 Corinthians 3, the Lord's Supper, Abrahamic vs. New Covenant retroactivity, nominalism, Ephesians 2–3, and Hebrews 10:15–22—arguing the Church participates without displacing Israel.
Darby, the New Covenant, and Dispensationalism
A historical correction showing that Darby denied the New Covenant was made with the Church while still affirming that believers presently enjoy its blessings through Christ.
A Progressive Dispensational Critique of Elliott E. Johnson's Definition of Inauguration
A Progressive Dispensational critique of Elliott E. Johnson's definition of inauguration, arguing that present covenant fulfillment in Christ cannot be separated from the covenant's operative reality.