Covenant Theology vs Dispensationalism: Israel and the Church

Review: The Church as a Replacement of Israel: An Analysis of Supersessionism: The Dissertation of Michael J. Vlach

Seem my post on Eschatology: Covenant Theology vs Dispensationalism to become oriented to the issues described in this article.

Michael J. Vlach, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Theology at the Master's Seminary and has a website I frequent that can be found at www.theologicalstudies.org.

I was debating whether to purchase, “Continuity and Discontinuity” a festschrift for S. Lewis Johnson or Prof. Vlach’s Ph.D. dissertation. After much debate, I decided, “hey, why not get both?” I did and can say I do not regret the decision. However, if you do not have the time for both, I say get Vlach’s dissertation. It is shorter, but you get an excellent feel for the topic. One of the great things about this book is how eloquently and forcefully he argues for the other side. He almost made me covenant theologian! Okay, but seriously, he does not pull any punches and gives a very compelling and thorough presentation of the covenantal side. Point being, BUY HIS DISSERTATION by clicking here .

I will try to briefly summarize my favorite points in his dissertation on this blog.

Dr. Vlach defines supersessionism (S) as "the view that the church is the new or true Israel that has permanently replaced or superseded national Israel as the people of God." (p. xv) This has been the normative perspective since very early on in the church and has recently been challenged and perhaps overtaken by nonsupersessionism. Nonsupersession (NS) is "the view that national Israel still has vital role and purpose in God's program." (p. 130) Whether one is S or NS has tremendous implications on how you read the Bible and one's own theology. The answer to this question will determine whether one is a follower of covenantal or dispensational theology.

Historical Perspective

Dr. Vlach sites three main factors for the acceptance of the supersessionism in Christianity: (pp. 31-32)

1) The increasing Gentile composition of the church.

2) The church's perception of destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and the failed Jewish revolt of Bar-Kokhba in A.D. 132 - 135 as God's judgment of the Jews.

3) A hermeneutical approach that allowed the church to appropriate Israel's promises to itself.

So, what factors have brought NS back into the spotlight?

1) The church's reevaluation of supersessionsim after the Holocaust and the establishment of the modern state of Israel. (pp. 70-71)

2) The rise of dispensational theology

The author makes an excellent point when he says that if S try to say "the weight of history" is on their side, than NS can say that recent history has shown that the great shift away from S should point into the favor of NS. (pp. 231-232)

Biblical Perspective

In presenting the case for either side, Dr. Vlach breaks his case into two categories: hermeneutical and theological (pp. vii - xi)

I. Hermeneutical Case for S

1) NT priority over the OT

S believes that the NT writers "sometimes introduced change, alteration, or expansion to the original meaning of OT texts, including those that speak of national Israel's restoration... As a result of this priority of the New Testament, Old Testament texts that speak of Israel's restoration should not be understood literally. They should be read in the light of the New Testament." (pp. 87-88)

2) Typological Interpretation

S supports the use of typological interpretation which Vlach defines as "a hermeneutical approach that attempts to understand the connection between the Old and New Testaments based on the type/antitype relationships found in the two testaments." (p. 89) Critical to this idea is that the historical grammatical approach is not enough to understand what God is saying. (p. 91)

3) Nonliteral Fulfillments of OT Passages

S generally believes that the application of certain "Old Testament prophetic texts regarding Israel's restoration" or fulfilled in "nonliteral ways in the New Testament church." (p. 96) Verses commonly used to support this are.

a) Acts 2:16-21

16but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel:
17'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says,
'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND;
AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY,
AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS,
AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
18EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN,
I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT
And they shall prophesy.
19'AND I WILL GRANT WONDERS IN THE SKY ABOVE
AND SIGNS ON THE EARTH BELOW,
BLOOD, AND FIRE, AND VAPOR OF SMOKE.
20'THE SUN WILL BE TURNED INTO DARKNESS
AND THE MOON INTO BLOOD,
BEFORE THE GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY OF THE LORD SHALL COME.
21'AND IT SHALL BE THAT EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.'

Here Dr. Vlach quotes Joseph A. Fitzmeyer who says of Peter's use of Joel, "Thus God's people will take a new shape under the guidance of the Spirit,; Israel itself will be reconstituted." (p.97)

b) Acts 15:15-18

15"With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written,
16'AFTER THESE THINGS I will return,
AND I WILL REBUILD THE TABERNACLE OF DAVID WHICH HAS FALLEN,
AND I WILL REBUILD ITS RUINS,
AND I WILL RESTORE IT,
17SO THAT THE REST OF MANKIND MAY SEEK THE LORD,
AND ALL THE GENTILES WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME,'
18SAYS THE LORD, WHO MAKES THESE THINGS KNOWN FROM LONG AGO.

Scholar's, like Anthony Hoekema and F.F. Bruce, support the idea that James, by quoting Amos 9:11-12 at the Jerusalem council, identifies the church as Israel. (p. 98)

c) Romans 9:24-26

24even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
25As He says also in Hosea,
"I WILL CALL THOSE WHO WERE NOT MY PEOPLE, 'MY PEOPLE,'
AND HER WHO WAS NOT BELOVED, 'BELOVED.'"
26"AND IT SHALL BE THAT IN THE PLACE WHERE IT WAS SAID TO THEM, 'YOU ARE NOT MY PEOPLE,'
THERE THEY SHALL BE CALLED SONS OF THE LIVING GOD."

Quoting G.E. Ladd "Paul deliberately takes these two prophecies about the future salvation of Israel and applies them to the church. The church consisting of Jews and Gentiles has become the people of God. The prophecies of Hosea are fulfilled in the Christian church." (p. 99)

II. Theological Case for S

1. Permanent Rejection of Israel

S sees the NT, describing a permanent rejection of the Jewish people and uses several verses to support this notion.

a) Matthew 21:43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it."

b) Romans 11:26 "and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB"

S generally believe that the "all Israel" here are the people of faith, "the true Israel" that is now the church.

2. New Testament Silence

The NT's "lack of an explicit reference to a restoration of national Israel in the New Testament is additional proof that Israel has been superseded by the church." (p. 108)

3. Application of Israelite Imagery to the Church

S note the use of common OT descriptions of Israel are no being applied to the church in these verses:

a) Galatians 6:16 And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

b) Romans 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;

c) Romans 2:28For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

d) 1 Peter 2:9 But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.

e)Galatians 3:7 Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham... 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

4. Equality Between Jews and Gentiles

a) Ephesians 2:11-22

11Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision" by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands--12remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. 17AND HE CAME AND PREACHED PEACE TO YOU WHO WERE FAR AWAY, AND PEACE TO THOSE WHO WERE NEAR; 18for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 19So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

Many S see this as the "incorporation of believing Gentiles into Israel" (pp. 122-123) and that it "argues against any future role for national Israel in the plan of God."

b) Romans 11:17-24

17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branch

These verses are used to show that "Jews and Gentiles are said to belong to the same place of blessing which includes the promises and covenants associated with Abraham and the Jewish patriarchs." (p. 124)

5. Church's Relationship to the New Covenant

a) Heb 8:8-13

8For finding fault with them, He says,
"BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD,
WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT
WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH;
9NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS
ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND
TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT;
FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT,
AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
10"FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL
AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD:
I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS,
AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS.
AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD,
AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
11"AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN,
AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,'
FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME,
FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
12"FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES,
AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE."

13When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

Since the original application of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31 was to Israel, yet in Hebrews 8 it find its fulfillment with the church, many S believe see this as further evidence that the church is the new Israel. (pp. 125-126)

III. Hermeneutical Case for NS

1. Belief that OT texts need to be interpreted in their own right and not reinterpreted by the NT

NS "assert that Old Testament texts, as understood within their historical grammatical contexts, must be the starting point for understanding God's plans for national Israel." (p. 134)

2. Progressive revelation does not cancel unconditional promises to Israel

Dr. Vlach says that according to John Feinberg as saying "if an Old Testament promise is made unconditionally with a specific group such as Israel, then that promise must be fulfilled with that group." (p. 137) Then quoting Paul Feinberg "How can the integrity of the OT text be maintained?" and "How can God be truthful and change the meaning of His promises?"

3. National Israel does not function as a type that is transcended by the Church

Though their may be some typological connection "unconditional promises, and the people with whom the promises were made are not types." (p. 140).

4. OT promises can have a double fulfillment or application with both Israel and the Church

The original promises made to Israel can find extensions into the church and are not abrogated as a result. Rather, the original promises to Israel still stand.

IV. Theological Case for NS

1. New Testament Keeps Israel and the Church Distinct

Dr. Vlach points out that the NT writers, even after the establishment of the church, uses the term "Israel" as a separate entity and a name that "is related to the 'national covenant people of the OT." (p. 145)

2. New Testament Affirms a Future for National Israel

a) Matthew 19:28 (Luke 22:30)

28And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

Jesus here explains that the 12 apostles will one day rule over a national Israel.

b) Matthew 23:37-39 (Luke 13:34-35)

37"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.
38"Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!
39"For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, 'BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!'"

The proclamation "Blessed .. name of the LORD" is from Psalm 118:26. This indicates the "joyful welcome of Jesus by the Jews with the parousia [second coming] and the restoration of Israel."

c) Luke 21:24

24and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

It seems here that Jesus is affirming that God has a set time period for the gentiles that is limited in duration. After this God will start His restoration program for Israel. Paul echoes this idea in Romans 11:25 "For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery--so that you will not be wise in your own estimation--that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;"

d) Acts 1:6-7

6So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?"
7He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority;

Many people have pointed out that after 40 days of instruction from our Lord Jesus Christ, the disciples were still wondering about the restoration of Israel! Dr. Vlach notes that NS "also believe that the lack of correction from Jesus in Acts 1:7 is validation that the disciples were correct in their beliefs about Israel's restoration." (p. 161)

e) Romans 11

This chapter is broken down into 3 main points.

i) Explicit affirmation "that national Israel has not been cast aside from the plan of God" (p. 162)

Romans 11:1-2a

1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be!... 2God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew

ii) "Explicit declaration that Israel will experience a national restoration at some point in the future" (p. 163)

Romans 11:26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
"THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB."
27"THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

iii) NS believes that "Rom 11:27-28 ties Israel's salvation and restoration to the promises of the new covenant in the Old Testament" (p. 163)

Romans 11:27-28

27"THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."
28From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers;

3. Fulfillment of New Covenant With Church and Israel

a. B/c the Church participates in the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant, this does not "abrogate the remaining covenant promises of a national nature, which will find their fulfillment for [in] Israel." (p. 169)

b. An "already/not yet" aspect of the New Covenant. (p. 169) Remember, the messianic age ushers in the New Covenant, and the church is privy to the spiritual aspects of it (ie creation of a new heart, indwelling of the Spirit, forgiveness, etc.).

c. The Church has not received all the physical promises given to Israel only the spiritual. This is further evidence that the Church is not the complete fulfillment of the New Covenant.

Final Analysis

V. Critique of S

Hermeneutics

1. Precedence of the NT over the OT

a. Casts doubt on the integrity of the OT texts and "one may rightly wonder in what sense the Old Testament revelations were actually revelations to the original readers of the promise.(p. 178)

b. "Does not adequately account for Old Testament texts that explicitly promise the perpetuity of Israel as a nation." (p. 179)

2. National Israel as a type for the Church

b. Though there is significant connection between the two, there is insufficient evidence to show that the Church has transcended Israel. Especially, with all the verses that affirm a national restoration.

3. Nonliteral fulfillment of OT texts

a. As we have seen, certain NT texts affirm the OT expectations for Israel.

Theological

1. National Israel's Permanent Rejection

a. Matthew 21:43 speaks taking away the Kingdom from the ruling class and giving to the people. In v. 46 the religious leaders believe Jesus in talking about them and "Saldarini points out that theologians who interpret 'nation' as teh church 'are reading in second-century Christian theology' " b/c exegetical it is unfeasible that the "nation" whom Jesus talks about is the Church. (p. 184)

b. For arguments against Romans 11:26, see Romans 11 section above.

2. NT Silence

a. First, it is important to note that there are statements that imply a future restoration for Israel.

b. Secondly, as S. Lewis Johnson says, "There is no need to repeat what is copiously spread over the pages of the Scriptures" (p. 189) therefore matters "discussed in the Old Testament should not be taken to mean ... [they have] been dropped or transformed. (p. 189)

3. Application of "Israel" language.

This in no way proofs S or excludes NS. The best argument put forth comes from Galatians 6:16 with Pual's statemet "Israel of God." This does not have to mean the church and there are better explanations such as "To show that his [Paul's] harsh attitude to the Judaizers did not extend to the true Jewish believers, he reaches out to these Jewish believers and calls them the 'Israel of God.' " (p. 193)

VI. Critique of NS

Hermeneutics

1. Belief that OT texts need to be interpreted in their own right and not reinterpreted by the NT

a. Though there may be additional applications or fulfillments and even recognizing that the NT does not use the OT in ways that are entirely consistent with the OT author's intent, "Yet to maintain the integrity of the Old Testament texts and their revelatory value, the historical-grammatical contexts of these passages must be given serious consideration..." (p. 211)

2. Progressive revelation does not cancel unconditional promises to Israel

a. As Paul states in Romans 11:29 "for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Dr. Vlach quotes House who says "Those who believe that the church has somehow taken over the blessings of Israel must explain the revoking of these apparently irrevocable callings of God on His people." (p. 213)

b. We must keep in mind that these OT promises can have a double fulfillment: presently in the church and in the future with Israel.

Theological

1. Distinction between Israel and the Church

a. Galatians 6:16 poses the most serious challenge, but that has been addressed above.

2. NT Affirms a Future for Israel

a. Matthew nor Luke never sees the Church as the "new Israel." This is almost always read back into the verses we mentioned above.

3. New Covenant for both Israel and the Church

a. When looking at Romans 11:27, it quotes Jeremiah 31:34. As Murray puts it, "There should be no question but [sic] Paul regards these Old Testament passages as applicable to the restoration of Israel." (p. 227).

VII. Conclusion

From this study, I believe that NS is much closer to the Biblical witness. I'm not saying there are no problems or that S is a weak argument, but I can confidently say NS is far closer to what the Scriptures say. S seem to depend a lot on having to interpret certain verses (ie Galatians 6:16) in certain ways, when there are often other alternative (and in my estimation) better interpretations.

Also, the OT verses that state that Israel and the gentiles will all worship God, take a very strange meaning if all believers are considered Israel - for who would the gentiles then be?

Zephaniah 3:20"At that time I will bring you in,
Even at the time when I gather you together;
Indeed, I will give you renown and praise
Among all the peoples of the earth,
When I restore your fortunes before your eyes,"
Says the LORD.

Isaiah 2:3 Many peoples will come and say,
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
to the house of the God of Jacob.
He will teach us his ways,
so that we may walk in his paths."
The law will go out from Zion,
the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Micah 4:2 Many nations will come and say,
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
to the house of the God of Jacob.
He will teach us his ways,
so that we may walk in his paths."
The law will go out from Zion,
the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
3 He will judge between many peoples
and will settle disputes for strong nations far and wide.
They will beat their swords into plowshares
and their spears into pruning hooks.
Nation will not take up sword against nation,
nor will they train for war anymore.

There are many other verses like these, that support NS.

I would like to end with a final quote from Dr. Vlach's paper:

"Because of the many complex issues involved with this issue and the significant number of theologians on both sides of the debate, we suggest that caution and humility permeate all discussions about superssesionism." (p. 175)

_________________

Vlach, Michael. “The Church as a Replacement of Israel: An Analysis of Supersessionism.” Ph.D. dissertation, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2004.

All Bible quotes from the NASB via www.biblegateway.com

A Primer on Eschatology: Covenant Theology vs Dispensationalism

Eschatology, which means “study of the last things” and oddly enough it is usually the topic Christians avoid and study last b/c it is so difficult. Though I am a dispensationalist, this post is not intended to be an argument for either side, rather a simple orientation so we can have a better idea of what each side believes. Hopefully, this post will help out some other confused individuals out there.

I. Covenant Theology (CT)

The basis of CT is the idea that, as William VanGemeren puts it, “Single plan of God, confirmed in the one mediator Jesus Christ”. [1]

This via 3 Covenants:

1) The Covenant of Grace

God has one plan of salvation , one mediator, and one eschatological plan all men share. [1]

2) The Covenant of Redemption

A specific agreement between the Father and the Son that they would exalt each other in the following way: the Father would honor the Son by sending him to save lost sinners through a penal self-sacrifice leading to a cosmic reign in which the central activity would be the imparting to sinners through the Holy Spirit of the redemption he won for them; and the Son would honor the Father by becoming the Father's love-gift to sinners and by leading them through the Spirit to trust, love and glorify the Father on the model of his own obedience to the Father's will. [2]

3) The Covenant of Works

Whereby God undertook to prolong and augment for all subsequent humanity the happy state in which he had made the first human pair -- provided that the man observed, as part of the humble obedience that was then natural to him, one prohibition, specified in the narrative as not eating a forbidden fruit. The penal sanctions of which was the loss of good and corruption of nature. [2]

II. Continuity Between the Two Testaments

CT sees a more continuous relationship between the two testaments. This stems from the idea of God having a singular plan (ie the 3 Covenants) for His elect.

1: The Tale of Two kingdoms: The Kingdom of God vs the Kingdom of Satan

Dr. John Currid of RTS would like for us to view the Bible with “Seed theology,” that is through an unfolding of the story between the Seed of the Woman and the Seed of the Serpent. [3] This starts from Genesis 3:15 and thus the world history as well as the Bible’s story is one that should be seen in a redemptive-historical perspective.

2. Supersessionism: Israel and the Church are one

The Church has superseded Israel and some view Israel as a type of the Church. One of the major motivating factors of this is that God has one Kingdom who He has given the Covenants to and thus He only has one people the Church.

3. Continuity between the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ

God gives His law to his covenanted people to establish a personal bond. The Law of Moses and the Law of Christ are not different. However, under Christ. the law is newly administered and more deeply expounded. There is discontinuity in its form or shape, but not in its essence. [4]

4. The Content of Faith

Though both camps believe that the saving work of Jesus Christ is the basis of all salvation, CT believes that ever since Adam and Eve, the content (not basis) of saving faith was the gospel - the message that Jesus Christ would be the redeemer. Though, it was not as fully known to all, it has been the basic message of Jesus Christ as the Savior that saves throughout all generations. [5]

5. The Conditionality of the Biblical Covenants (Abrahamic, Davidic, etc.)

As a gross generalization, CT sees the Biblical covenants as conditional and dispensationalists see them as unconditional.

III. Hermeneutics of CT

Three hermeneutical beliefs [6]

a. Precedence of the NT over the OT

b. National Israel as a type for the Church

c. Nonliteral fulfillment of OT texts

IV. Views on The Millenium

Note: When Christians talk about amillennialism, postmillennialism, and premillennialism, the point of reference is the second coming of Jesus Christ, not the Rapture. So a “premillennialist” would believe that the second coming is before the millennial kingdom, “post” would be believe that Jesus is coming after the millennial kingdom (though they do not believe in a literal 1,000 year kingdom), and “amillennialist” would not believe in an earthly millennial kingdom. I mention this b/c this is often confused with the terms “pretribulation”, “midtribulation”, and “postribulation” which refer to the timing of the Rapture, not the second coming.

i. Amillennialism [7]

1. Promises to Israel are spiritual and typical

2. Promises are fulfilled in Christ's reign of the Church now and in the eternal state.

3. Israel has lost their privilege

4. Some believe there will be a large in pouring of Jewish believers one day.

ii. Postmillennialism [7]

1. Gospel will be spread through out the earth and spiritual and material blessings will come to all people. Then Christ will come.

2. Promises to Israel are spiritual and typical

iii. Non-dispensational Premillennialism [7]

1. Literal 1,000 year reign of Christ, but without a specific Jewish Emphasis.

2. +/- a great ingathering of Jewish believers, but not a restoration of the nation-state of Israel.

V. Timeline of History

Both CT and dispensationalism separate the world’s history into different eras. Klooster a CT, has divided history into the following categories: [5]

Ethnic Universalism

1. Pre-Fall

a. Covenant of Works
b. Covenant of Grace (protoevangelion)
c. Start the Seed of the serpent vs Seed of the woman

2. The Fall and Two Kingdoms

a. Cain vs Abel

3. The Flood and Babel

i. Flood

a. The sons of God and the sons of men intermingling, endangering the promise in Gen 3:15 and the Kingdom of God (remember by then only Noah was righteous), therefore God sends a flood to wipe out the kingdom of the serpent.
b. The Noahic covenant was not a new dispensation, but an elaboration of the ruling task of Adam, now in a postdiluvian (postflood) era.

Ethnic Particularism

ii. Babel

a. The kingdom of the serpent in a new apostasy, however God promised never to flood the earth again. So He confuses their language.
b. End of ethnic universalism
c. Pentecost is the redemptive counterpart, where all the nations are now united via Christ.

4. Abraham and the Patriarchs

a. God's Kingdom is now moved onto Abraham and Israel
b. Abraham and Israel are chosen by God to birth the Redeemer-King.
c. The diversity of God's actions promotes one redemptive program.
d. Institution of the First Sacrament - Circumcision (looks forward to Christ)

5. Theocratic Kingdom of Israel: Exodus to the end of the OT

a. Institution of the Second Sacrament - Passover (looks forward to Christ)
b. Moses as covenant mediator with Israel parallels Christ as covenant mediator with the Church.

Intertestamental Period

6. Inauguration of the Messianic Kingdom

a. All the covenant promises fulfilled in Christ.
b. With the veil torn the Levitical (Phineas) covenant was fulfilled.
c. New covenant starts
d. The new sacraments of baptism and communion instituted (looks back at Christ).

7. Pentecost to the end of the NT

a. The Church is not a parenthesis, but an administrator of the covenant sacraments and keeper of the keys of the Kingdom.
b. Already and not yet aspects of the Kingdom.
c. Christ is ruling right now.

8. The second coming and the consummation of the Kingdom

a. The Kingdom of Christ will win over the World and than Christ will come.

I. Dispensationalism (D)

One of the most often quoted and influential members of Dispensationalism (D) is Dr. Charles Ryrie who says there are three necessary conditions for D: [8]

1) The distinction between Israel and the church

2) The usage of a system of literal hermeneutics

3) The belief that the underlying purpose of God in the world is to produce his glory.

Dr. John Feinberg gives us a more in depth analysis of the essentials of D. [7]

A. Recognizing multiple senses of words like "Jew," "Israel," and "Abraham's seed."

i. These are used in a genetic, political, spiritual, and typological sense and no sense is more important (especially spiritual) or cancels another.

B. Hermeneutics

i. The progress of revelation and the OT vs NT priority:

CT as we have seen, read the OT reinterpreted in light of the NT, but this is vice versa for Dispensationalism. NT has priority for CT b/c the OT was the shadow and NT the fulfillment, so the claim that you should take the clear revelation (NT) to understand the hidden (OT). D believes that the promises of the OT (ie to Israel) are clear and not all typological and remain unfulfilled in the NT. Therefore they are not canceled b/c unconditional promises of God can never be canceled.

ii. NT use of the OT, and typology.

Types are not allegories or symbolize that lose their meaning later. Types are rooted in historical facts. The NT writers never explicitly say that they cancel out the original meaning and different NT writers use the same OT verses differently. Double or multiple fulfillment of certain prophecies are the issue here, not their cancellation.

C. Unconditionality of the Biblical covenants (Abrahamic, Davidic, etc.).

Covenants are not only spiritual, but social, economic, and political as well. They can extend to others (ie New Covenant onto Gentiles), but its primary fulfillment is to Israel. One should not emphasize only one aspect of the covenant (ie spiritual) at the expense of the other aspects.

Again, as a gross generalization, C sees the covenants as conditional and D as unconditional.

D. Distinctive future for ethnic Israel

1. A belief in premillenialism with a distinctive Jewish emphasis is prominent

2. OT and tribulation saints are part of the Kingdom

3. Some believe the fulfillment is all in the future (classical D) and others believe some spiritual aspects are happening now (progressive D) ie the Kingdom here/now hypothesis.

E. The Church is a distinctive organism (from Israel) that began at Pentecost and is united with Christ.

F. Philosophy of History

The more one stresses redemptive history to the exclusion of God's other work, the more one is C. The more one stresses God's multi-faceted work in history, the more one is D.

G. Things Not Essential to Dispensationalism

a. Dispensations are not essential to dispensationalism

b. The idea that each dispensation is a test and failure nor the number of dispensations one holds is not essential

c. Calvinism or Arminianism

d. One's understanding of the law

e. A belief in multiple ways of salvation (This is in fact a misunderstanding of D thought and emphatically denied by many). [8]

II. Discontinuity Between the Two Testaments

As we can see from the essentials, D sees a more discontinuous relationship between the two testaments.

1: The Tale of Two People: Israel and the Church

D believes that God has two separate programs: one for Israel and one for the Church. The predominant view is that God used Israel from Abraham until Pentecost. From Pentecost to the Rapture, God will use the Church. After the Rapture, God will restart His program with Israel and His promises for Israel will come to fruition in the Millennial Kingdom.

2. Nonsupersessionism: Israel and the Church are separate

From what we have said so far, it should come to no surprise that D does not believe that the Church has replaced Israel or that Israel was a type for the Church.

3. Discontinuity between the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ

D believes that the Law of Moses was temporal in its nature and fulfilled (thus abrogated) with the coming of Christ. Thus, NT believers are no longer under the Law.

4. The Content of Faith

To quote John Feinberg:

The ultimate object of faith in any and every age is God Himself. The ultimate issue at any time in history is whether a man will take God at His word and exercise faith in the provision for salvation which God reveals… it is important to remember that since in each economy the content is what God has revealed, belief in the content for that age is belief in the ultimate object of faith. [8]

So those who adhere to D, say that though Jesus was the basis/grounds for all salvation, people in the OT could not have known about Jesus b/c God did not reveal Him until the NT times. Therefore, people in the OT were still saved by faith in whatever God had revealed to them up to that time, for how could they believe in someone they never heard about?

5. The Unconditionality of the Biblical Covenants (Abrahamic, Davidic, etc.)

As a gross generalization, CT sees the Biblical covenants as conditional and dispensationalists see them as unconditional and yet to be fulfilled.

III. Hermeneutics of D

Four hermeneutical beliefs [6]

a. Belief that OT texts need to be interpreted in their own right and not reinterpreted by the NT

b. Progressive revelation does not cancel unconditional promises to Israel

c. National Israel does not function as a type that is transcended by the Church

d. OT promises can have a double fulfillment or application with both Israel and the Church

IV. Views on The Millenium

Premillennialism

D believes in that the second coming of Christ is before the start of the millennial kingdom and that it is a literal 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ on the earth before the eternal state. Important to this idea, as previously mentioned, is that it is the fulfillment of many promises made to the nation of Israel (ie the restoration of their land, preeminence among the nations, kingship of the Messiah, etc.)

To quote Dr. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum:

While it is true that the millennium (that is, one thousand years) is found only in Revelation 20, the belief in the Messianic Kingdom does not rest on this passage alone. In fact, it hardly rests on it at all. The basis for the belief in the Messianic Kingdom is twofold. First: there are the unfulfilled promises of the Jewish covenants, promises that can only be fulfilled in a Messianic Kingdom. Second: there are the unfulfilled prophecies of the Jewish prophets. There are numerous prophecies of the Old Testament that speak of the coming of the Messiah Who will reign on David’s Throne, and rule over a peaceful Kingdom. There is a great amount of material in the Old Testament on the Messianic Kingdom, and the belief in a Messianic Kingdom rests on the basis of a literal interpretation of this massive material.[9]

Also, the idea of the rapture and a seven year tribulation is prominent within premillennial eschatology and though there is some disagreement as to the timing of the rapture.

i. Pretribulational rapture

Rapture occurs before the tribulation b/c the Church is supposed to be saved from the wrath of God that He pours out during those seven years.

ii. Midtribulational rapture

Rapture occurs at the halfway point of the tribulation. The severity of the later half of the tribulation is much greater and is even called the “great tribulation” and this is what the Church is saved from.

iii. Postribulational Rapture

Rapture occurs after the tribulation, as the saints are supposed to be tested through the seven years of tribulation.

V. Timeline of History

D generally divides biblical history into different dispensations. Dispensations are defined by the Scofield Reference Bible as "a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God. Seven such dispensations are distinguished in Scripture."[12] Dr. Charles Ryrie has noted that this has caused some confusion and defines it as:

“A distinguishable economy in the outworking of God's purpose.” [12]

There have been seven classical dispensations, which I believe were first described by CI Scofield. Here they are:

The Seven Classic Dispensations (Red are my inserts) [10]

1. Innocence (freedom) - Edenic covenant

This is the time before the Fall in the Garden of Eden, where Man’s responsibility to God was not to eat from the tree of Good and Evil.

2. Consciense (moral responsibility) - Adamic covenant (protoevangelion)

By the fall, Adam and Eve acquired and transmitted to the [human] race the knowledge of good and evil. This gave conscience a basis for right moral judgment, and hence the race came under this measure of responsibility-to do good and eschew evil. [13]

3. Human government - Noahic covenant

Out of the fearful judgment of the flood God saved eight persons, to whom, after the waters were assuaged, He gave the purified earth with ample power to govern it. This, Noah and his descendants were responsible to do. The dispensation of human government resulted, upon the plain of Shinar, in the impious attempt to become independent of God and closed in judgment: the confusion of tongues. [13]

4. Promise (patriarchal rule) - Abrahamic covenant

Out of the dispersed descendants of the builders of Babel, God called one man, Abram, with whom He enters into covenant. [13] God moves specifically to work through one man’s descendants.

5. Law - Mosaic/Sinatic, Palestinian, (Levitical/Phineas), Davidic, New covenants

With the introduction of the Law, there is major shift in how God is dealing with man. Now, mankind is obligated to follow the specific regulations contained within the Mosaic Law.

*Christ's Earthly Ministry

Jesus describes this time as unique and one where there should be “no fasting while the bridegroom is there.” Besides, it should go without say that due to Jesus’ physical presence on earth there is a different economy between God and man (eg. whatever He said was authoritative and must be followed). In addition, specific economic shifting events such as the rejection of the Messiah by Israel and His death and resurrection occurred during this time.

*Apostolic Age

The authority of Christ was laid upon the Apostles and they spoke infallibly in regards to the faith. This period is also marked by the miraculous sign gifts working prolificially within the layity of the Church and the writing of the NT.

6. The Church, Grace (Mystery Parenthesis)

Our current age that is between God’s program for Israel. God is now using the Church to spread salvation and the Kingdom into the world.

7. The Kingdom (Millenial Kingdom)

The return of Christ on Earth with the whole world under his reign. Israel has prominence among the nations, though the whole world is now at peace and full of blessing. Although sin, unbelief, and death are weakened, they are still in existence.

*The Eternal state

God now dwells among His saints (cf. Rev 21:3). The the New Heavens, the New Earth, and the New Jerusalem are ushered in. Finally, sin and death are no more and all His saints will now be forever glorified and directly be with Him for all eternity.

VI. Progressive Dispensationalism vs Classcial Dispensationalism

Currently, there is much discussion within dispensationalism. Much of this centers around the idea of progressive dispensationalism that was made popular by Drs. Darrell Block, Craig Blaising, and Robert Saucy. Though this may be a little off topic, I believe it is important to understand the difference between the two. Rev. Jack Brook has an excellent summary of the major differences between the two views: [11]

1. One plan of salvation: There is only one plan of redemption, not one for Israel and a different one for Christians. There is only one New Covenant, not two. The redemptive plan is revealed through God’s covenants. It begins with Abraham’s covenant, which combines physical and spiritual promises. David’s covenant, as developed by the later prophets also has redemptive application, since the Savior would be the Son of David. The New Covenant obtains redemption in fulfillment of the Abrahamic and Davidic. The redemptive plan is holistic, not manifold.

2. Four dispensations: There are four dispensations:

• Patriarchal
• Mosaic
• Ecclesial (Church)
• Zionic (subdivided into millennial and eternal-kingdom phases.)

3. One people of God: The Christian Church is quite distinct from Israel, but not radically distinct. The Church is not a mere “parenthesis” in an otherwise-Jewish divine plan. The Church is not “Plan B”. It is not a separate category of humanity, in the way the Bible speaks of Jews or Greeks. There is continuity between the Church and Israel, not discontinuity alone. All believers from all dispensations are united in one general assembly in heaven (Hebrews 12.)

4. Complimentary hermeneutics: The old claim that a consistent grammatical-historical method of interpretation will always produce traditional dispensationalists is demonstrably untrue. The NT doesn’t follow Charles Ryrie’s definition of “consistent literalism” in the way that it handles OT prophecy. The NT often expands upon the OT prophecies, without contradicting their original contexts. Implications are developed from words which were not developed in the OT. PD calls this a “complementary” hermeneutic: The NT adds onto the OT prophecies in a way complementary to their original context.

5. Already/Not Yet: The Kingdom of God’s blessings are mostly reserved for Christ’s second advent, but parts of it are manifested today through the Holy Spirit. The geo-political aspects will occur in the future. The Church is grafted into some key aspects of the New Covenant (justification, the gift of the Spirit, resurrection hope), but the geo-political features for Israel have not yet happened.

6. Davidic Reign Now: Christ’s Davidic reign began in part when He ascended to the right hand of the Father. Some of the Davidic promises have been fulfilled, many others must wait until Christ returns. Salvation blessings are mediated to us through Jesus, who fulfilled Psalm 110:1-2. “Christ” and “Son of God” were both Davidic titles. Jesus’ priesthood is that of Melchizedek, an office originally given to David. Jesus’ Davidic kingship was the method by which God would fulfill all of His promises to Abraham (Luke 1:55)

________________________

[1] Vangemeren, Willem. “Systems of Continuity.” In Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments. (Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 37-62.

[2] Packer, JI. Gospel Pedlar. INTRODUCTION: ON COVENANT THEOLOGY. Cited 04 Feb. 2009. <http://www.gospelpedlar.com/articles/Bible/cov_theo.html>

[3] Currid, John. Judges through Poets [Online Lectures]. Retrieved from http://itunes.rts.edu audio lectures.

[4] Chamblin, Knox. “The Law of Moses and The Law of Christ.” In Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments. (Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 181-202.

[5] Klooster, Fred. “The Biblical Method for Salvation: The Case for Continuity.” In Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments. (Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 131-160.

[6] Vlach, Michael. “The Church as a Replacement of Israel: An Analysis of Supersessionism.” Ph.D. dissertation, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2004.

[7] Feinberg, John. “Systems of Discontinuity.” In Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments. (Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 63-88.

[8] John S. Feinberg, “Salvation in the Old Testament” Tradition and Testament. Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981. Hbk. ISBN: 0802425445. pp.39-77.

[9] Fruchtenbaum, Arnold. Pre-Trib Research Center. Premillennialism in the Old Testament. Cited 04 Feb. 2009. <>

[10] Ross, Allen. “The Biblical Method for Salvation: The Case for Discontinuity.”In Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments. (Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 161-180

[11] Brooks, Jack. EndTime.org. Progressive Dispensationalism: What is it? Cited 04 Feb. 2009.

[12] Ryrie, Charles. Biblecentre.org. What Is a Dispensation? Chapter 2 of "Dispensationalism" Cited 04 Feb. 2009. <http://www.biblecentre.org/topics/ccr_2_dispensationalism.htm>

[13] Socfield, CI. Biblecentre.org. THE SEVEN DISPENSATIONS. Cited 04 Feb. 2009. http://www.biblecentre.org/topics/cis_rd_2_seven_disp.htm