Dr. Chafer On Covenant Theology

[JoelH]

As I mentioned in another thread, I am a member of a church that holds to the covenant theology view of scripture. I don't agree with their view of doctrine. I am there for personal reasons. But I think most of them are sincere in their faith, believing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died for their sins. I think it is sad when Christians, who love the Lord, view other Christians as "foes" because we differ in what we view as "truth" of the scriptures. Personally, I am a traditional dispensationalist. But I don't think Covenant Theology is "dangerous", it is simply in error.

Officially, the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) lists dispensationalism as "conservative heresy" - despite its theological liberalism, this is a position that Jesus-is-God-believing Covenant theologians would not dissent. So they aren't that charitable to us in the first place anyway.

I have seen two camps in the broad evangelical Christendom who call themselves Covenant theology believers: one is the "pop" faction who are into Rick Warren, Alpha, and now the Emergent Church (Stephen Sizer, many of the "we don't discuss eschatology" type of the "middle ground evangelical churches"), and the other a "hardcore theology" faction who are hardcore 5-point Calvinists (John Gerstner, John Piper, R.C. Sproul). And they are both relatively favourable to Arabs over Jews in the Israeli-Arab conflicts.

[CarolLyn]

Officially, the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) lists dispensationalism as "conservative heresy" - despite its theological liberalism, this is a position that Jesus-is-God-believing Covenant theologians would not dissent. So they aren't that charitable to us in the first place anyway.

I have seen two camps in the broad evangelical Christendom who call themselves Covenant theology believers: one is the "pop" faction who are into Rick Warren, Alpha, and now the Emergent Church (Stephen Sizer, many of the "we don't discuss eschatology" type of the "middle ground evangelical churches"), and the other a "hardcore theology" faction who are hardcore 5-point Calvinists (John Gerstner, John Piper, R.C. Sproul). And they are both relatively favourable to Arabs over Jews in the Israeli-Arab conflicts.

The church I'm in is in the R.C. Sproul camp. Thankfully, eschatology is almost never discussed, except for an occasional criticism of Hal Lindsey. They accuse Hal Lindsey of date setting (something he supposedly did years ago). If it's true, I don't know about it. I've tried to find out, but no one seems to know.

Yes, I think they consider dispensationalism as heresy. However, I was amazed to read a commentary by R.C. Sproul (our pastor's favorite seminary professor) in a devotional on Romans chapter 11, he made the following statements: Referencing Ro.11:26,27:
26. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27. For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Sproul says:"Paul may be referring to spiritual Israelites when he speaks of "all Israel," meaning elect Jews and Gentiles who constitute the church throughout all time. Another possibility is that he is thinking of all elect Jews throughout history. But he also may be telling us that there will be a future mass conversion of elect Jews. This is what Paul seemed to be hinting at in verses 12, 15, and 24:"
12. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
15. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
24. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Sproul continues, "Also, it is the interpretation that seems to fit best with verse 25, which speaks of an end to Israel's partial blindness. And finally, Paul has been speaking about natural Israel, showing that the Jews were "set apart" by God's choice of Abraham, so it would be odd for him to begin addressing spiritual Israel at this point." Then he said--"The idea of a future ingathering of Jews seems strange to us--just as Jews in the early church struggled to accept the salvation of Gentiles. Despite this strangeness, we must let Scripture inform our hearts and minds as to the ways of God among men. Ask God for His help to understand this difficult passage."

Here are a couple more quotes on his commentary on Romans 11:28-32
28. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30. For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31. Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
Sproul says, "We must remember that Paul has told us that God will bypass the Jews neither completely nor eternally. As he puts it here, "concerning the election they are beloved." If we consider what Paul has taught us about God's plans for the Jews over the long term, it is clear that they are still beloved. There must be many Jews, living or yet to live, among His elect people, and they will be called in due time, coming with the trickle of Jews before "the fullness of the Gentiles" is complete or during the flood after God switches the focus of His redemptive call from Gentiles to Jews once more . and "It comes down to this: God's promises to the Jews, rightly understood, are still in effect, but the fulfillment still lies ahead. That means there is no reason for anyone to doubt the great promises of the Gospel. "The Lord is not slack concerning His promise" (2 Peter 3:9a), though it may seem so at times. God has a plan for His people that stretches from Creation to consummation, and He will fulfill it. Never let yourself doubt His Word, and never let His Word be questioned unchallenged. Only trust Him: As He has said, so He will do."(These quotes are from Tabletalk, from Ligonier Ministries and R.C.Sproul, September, 2002).

Oh, Hallelujah!!! When I read these words, written by this highly regarded leader of the reformed movement, I was beside myself with joy and praise to the Lord. It appears that the Lord is at least starting to illumine their hearts and minds regarding these mysteries of His dealings with Israel and His plans for end times.

(Edited to add scriptures)

[CarolLyn]

To clarify my above comments for those not familiar with Covenant Theology, they are generally known for teaching what is referred to as "replacement theology". That is, that God is finished with Israel, and that the church has now taken their (Israel's) place as far as end times prophecy is concerned. Actually, covenant theologians have explained to me that they don't really think that the church has taken Israel's place, but rather that there was never any distinction between Israel and the church in the first place. They refer to the church as "spiritual Israel". They often speak of the "Old Testament church". They believe that we are all children of Abraham and we are all beneficiaries of the Abrahamic covenant. And that all of the other covenants given to Israel are under the "umbrella" of the Abrahamic covenant and we (the church) are beneficiaries of those covenants as well.

blessedinhim, I hope I haven't jumped way ahead of you in the material you plan to cover in this study. I just thought these explanations were necessary to clarify my response to Joel. :)

[BlessedinHim]

no, you only help by adding what you know and have heard from those. I can kinda see what they are saying a little bit. From what you said. Jesus did have something to say about that in the NT. Dont have time to get the verse right now.

I have a prayer request in the request area. I wont be able to do much for a few days. My husband is in the hospital.
http://www.rr-bb.com/showthread.php?t=7246 this link will take you to the prayer request, so to keep this thread on topic.

Thank you


http://withchrist.org/MJS/chafonct.htm

Here is where I am getting my information and thoughts to discuss in this thread. Carry on. I will catch up when I am able to get back.

[CarolLyn]

blessedinhim, I will be praying for your dh, as well as for you and your family. :pray

[CarolLyn]

Here is a pretty brief and probably accurate summary of what Covenant theologians teach....from
http://www.gotquestions.org/covenant-theology.html

Those who hold to Covenant Theology believe that there is and has always been only one people of God. They believe that Israel was the Church in the Old Testament, and the Church is Israel in the New Testament. What were promises of land, many descendants, and blessing in the Old Testament to Israel has been converted to spiritual blessings for the Church in the New Testament. Those who hold to Covenant Theology also do not interpret prophecy in a normal sense. As an example, in Revelation 20, the thousand year reign of Christ is spoken of. Covenant Theology would say that the number 1,000 is symbolic and really does not mean a literal 1,000 years. They would say that we are in the millennium right now, that the reign of Christ with his saints is going on in heaven right now, and that the 1,000 year period is symbolic, beginning with the first coming of Christ and ending when he returns.

Based on the above article, it appears to me that covenant theology is the opposite of dispensationalism in their interpretation of scripture. In order to maintain their view, they spiritualize virtually all of the OT scriptures regarding the millennial reign of Christ, as well as the book of Revelation.

[Iron Monkey]

Covenant Theologians do not teach Replacement Theology. That is a common pejorative used by dispensationals to criticize those who disagree with them, which would include most if not all of the early church believers. I find it odd that CT are defined as such seeing how it is Dispensationals who say teach that God has replaced Israel within this Parenthetical age. CT teach Expansion, not Replacement. There would be nothing to replace seeing as how CT believe that the Church existed in the OT as well. What was once specifically a Jewish entity, though not exclusive to Gentiles, has now in the New Covenant been inclusive of All kinds of people.

[Mentat]

Almost every article I have read on CT vs. Dispensationalism carries a strong bias on the part of the author, according to their views. I have read Dispensationalism that present CT as a straw man, and CT articles that do the reverse. This makes it hard to understand what is orthodox. To make matters worse, in each camp, there are a lot of tents. (No common view)

Please check out this link bellow, and comment on it's accuracy on presenting the Dispensationalism view. I am interested to hear everyone's perspective.

http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/apologetics/Covenant%20Theology%20&%20Justification/Ligons_covtheology/09.htm

[Sing4Him]

Is it possible to have a list of who is what?

like:
MacAthur.. doesn't he lean Covenant? yet I have heard he is partially dispen? :doh

others??
Reformed is Calvinist?

[Saved by Grace_06]

Is it possible to have a list of who is what?

like:
MacAthur.. doesn't he lean Covenant? yet I have heard he is partially dispen? :doh

others??
Reformed is Calvinist?

MacAuthur is a Calvinist that adheres to dispensationalism.