Dispensationism and Covenant Theology

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
konroh

konroh

Senior Member
#1
Sep 17, 2013
615
21
18
#1
konroh said:
There are many Amillenialists who still believe that there is some future for the Jews. They read Romans 9-11 and can't help but see that Paul still believes there is a future for the Jews, maybe it's not in the promise of an eternal land, but the Church hasn't entirely replaced Israel as the recipients of God's blessing.

Likewise there are many Dispensationalists like myself who believe that the idea that God has two separate programs that are unrelated for the Jews and the Church is a line drawn too bold and too black. I don't like the idea of a parenthesis as if God made a mistake and since many Jews rejected Jesus, God suddenly came up with the Church idea. While I do see the church as a mystery (something not fully revealed in the OT) I don't see it as not being God's purpose all along. Paul's analogy of a natural olive tree fits the scenario the best. In the outworking of God's blessing many of the natural branches of the olive tree (the Jewish people) were cut off (they didn't believe in the Messiah) and wild olive branches (Gentiles) were grafted in (they believed in Jesus). Paul makes it clear that those natural olive branches can very easily be grafted back into the tree of blessing, in fact, they should take to the tree of blessing more easily as a natural olive branch, they were the first ones to receive the oracles of God.

In the outworking of God's economy He wanted to reveal Himself to all the people He had created. He chose to make Abraham a nation through which all nations could be blessed. Much of that has been accomplished. But much of it has not been. When we look at the OT prophecies literally it appears that the Messiah would rule the nation of Israel from Jerusalem, with spiritual blessing for all the earth.

It appears that Christ did indeed inaugurate the New Covenant, but did not fully fulfill it. It would appear that Jer. 31 had the idea that all Israel would come under the New Covenant and be saved. All Israel did not do this, some branches were cut off and didn't believe. But Paul says that All Israel will be saved. Clearly from Hebrews the Church participates in the New Covenant, but Hebrews, while fully extolling all the benefits the Church receives from the New Covenant, still quotes Jer. 31 that the houses of Israel and Judah will be the beneficiaries of this covenant.

There are only two possibilities, either the definition of Israel and Judah from the book of Jeremiah (which all would agree meant physical people of Israel and Judah) was changed to a spiritual definition, meaning spiritual descendants of Israel and Judah, or the definition did not change.

I'm inclined to believe that the definition did not change, because if God changed the meaning to a meaning that there was no way Jeremiah's readers and hearers could possibly have understood, then what's to say God can't change the meaning of words we read in the NT on us? There is no surety if God can change the meaning of words as we would be expected to understand them.

There is continuity in God's plan and there is distinction, may we all have the wisdom to be discerning.
Click to expand...
 
H

Historicist

Banned
#2
Dec 29, 2013
599
6
0
#2
konroh, all Israel means both houses, the house of Israel and the house of Judah. This, as Hebrews 8-10 explain is with whom the New Covenant was made. Not understanding this leads one to not recognize Hebrews as an epistle to Hebrew-Israelites, to not recognize the fact that Israel did not reject Jesus 2000 years ago. Again, Hebrews does not identify Israelites in the context of a people who were not recipients of the New Covenant. See also James 1:1, ("to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.") All of the general epistles describe twelve tribed Israel as a people accepting of Jesus and the New Covenant, that which was promised to, and made with, both houses of Israel.
 
konroh

konroh

Senior Member
#3
Sep 17, 2013
615
21
18
#3
Some in the house of Israel and Judah rejected Christ, some did not. The new Covenant of Jer. 31 was for the house of Israel, but it is also for those who are of Israel by faith. This does not negate the reality of the future promise that will be fulfilled literally for the physical people of Israel, but it will be the physical people who also become the spiritual people of Israel, they will believe in their Messiah, they will believe in Jesus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.