what is replacement theology?
if you believe there's such a thing as an "heresy" which says the church 'replaced'/displaced israel (apparently that's amillennialIslam),
you are a Dispensationalist, since dispensationalists maintain a distinction between the church and israel.
clarify though re: replacement theology - just so i'm clear.
scripture is clear that the church (the called-out) are God's people of faith in the OT (Hebrews 11), the jews who believe(d), and the gentiles who are grafted in -
the Israel of God....there's nothing to replace....is there?
trying to claim 'historic premillennialism' doesn't work for you. you're a dispensationalist by admission.
not only by your accusation of 'replacement theology' here, but in other posts.
did believing jews, to whom Christ and the Apostles went
first enter the New Covenant or not?
or was The Kingdom Postponed for the jews and they didn't receive the promise of the New Covenant (forgiveness of sins according to Daniel 9)?
~
Let us now go on with our examination of the dispensational theory by looking at the dispensational teaching on the new covenant. Since those twenty-seven books of Scripture that were written after the life of Jesus are named the New Testament or covenant,
one would expect that all Christians would uncompromisingly acknowledge the Christian nature of the new covenant. Such an acknowledgment, however, is not easy or simple for the consistent dispensationalist. As it turns out, when the dispensationalist tries to bend Scripture to fit his system, the Biblical data on the new covenant is among the most stubbornly unyielding and uncooperative. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie says the following about dispensational interpretation of the new covenant:
“Although the new covenant is one of the major covenants of Scripture,
a clear statement of its meaning and of its relationship to the [dispensational] premillennial system is needed. Even among [dispensational] premillennialists there seems to be a lack of knowledge concerning this covenant.”
1
[Dispensational] premillennialists are divided into three groups as far as their interpretation of the new covenant is concerned. This does not evince weakness, for not one of the views contradicts the system.
2
The classic passage on the new covenant is Jeremiah 31. Please take note: Jeremiah is an Old Testament prophecy, and dispensationalists teach that no Old Testament prophecy can refer directly to the New Testament church. Dispensationalists interpret Jeremiah 30 and 31 as referring to their futuristic tribulation period which is to occur after the rapture of the church and to their Judaistic millennium.
3 The “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7) is identified with the seven-year tribulation period, and the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is viewed as a millennial blessing upon Israel.
According to Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost:
“This covenant must follow the return of Christ at the second advent.”
4
“This covenant will be realized in the millennial age.”
5
Regardless of the relationship of the church to the new covenant as explained in these three views, there is one general point of agreement:
the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 must and can be fulfilled only by the nation Israel and not by the Church.
6
According to Dr. John F. Walvoord,
…
the [dispensational] premillennial position is that the new covenant is with Israel and the fulfillment in the millennial kingdom after the second coming of Christ.
7
The [dispensational] premillennial view, though varying in detail, insists that the new covenant as revealed in the Old Testament concerns Israel and requires fulfillment in the millennial kingdom.
8
According to Dr. Charles C. Ryrie,
…
it can be shown that the period of the new covenant is millennial.
9
I very much agree with this last statement by Dr. Ryrie, but will qualify my agreement by identifying the millennium as a present reality just as the New Covenant is (In other words, I affirm
the amillennial view). It seems to me that this [dispensationalist premillennial] insistence on identifying the New Covenant as a
future reality for
Israel in a
future earthly reign goes hand in hand with the failure to see the Church as true Israel today (e.g. Romans 2:28-29; 4:11-14; 9:6-8; Gal. 3:7, 28-29; 6:15-16; Phil. 3:3; Rev. 2:9; 3:9). It also goes hand in hand with a failure to see that the Old Testament prophets spoke in much detail regarding this present Church age.
http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/tag/sam-storms/