Dr. Chafer On Covenant Theology

[BenOne]

Why not try someone different in evaluating dispensational teaching?

Dr. David L. Cooper, Biblical Research Society Founder.
<biblicalresearchstudiesgroup>, I think is the address.

Have fun, as some other wag quipped.

BenOne

:nod:wave

[Mentat]

Why not try someone different in evaluating dispensational teaching?

Dr. David L. Cooper, Biblical Research Society Founder.
<biblicalresearchstudiesgroup>, I think is the address.

:nod:wave

It is:

http://www.biblicalresearch.info/index.html

I will read through it and let you know. Thanks!

[Elect1]

Hi everyone! I just became a member because of this thread (and it looked like Saved by Grace_06 needed a friend!). I must say I am quite impressed that you guys are seeing how people misrepresent the beliefs of Covenant theology by using the term “replacement theology”. It is refreshing to know there are so many out there with open minds to what Covenant theology teaches and who are willing to study the Scriptures to test those beliefs. Being a deacon in a Reformed church, I think I can answer many of the questions posed in this thread and direct you to some solid resources if you are interested!

[Saved by Grace_06]

Thanks Elect! Grace and Peace to you elect brother!!

[BlessedinHim]

This last couple of months for me is the first I have really thought about the "great" theologies out there. I have mostly just leaned on that what the bible says is true. I dont understand all of it, and wont until the Lord returns. Now that doesnt mean I dont study to find out what it means, but mostly we have to rely on the Holy Spirit to open it up to us as we can handle it. So far, of the studying I have done, none of them are 100 percent wrong that I can see so far, but then neither are any of them 100 percent correct.

Sorry I havent been able to finish out this study, I will be glad when I can get back to it. I want to see where it leads. Just for the record, just because I posted this view point or any other view point, doesnt mean I lean on that view point as truth. It is merely a study to see if what they say is true. Study on, I can hardly wait to see what is truth.

I will be back when I can.

[CarolLyn]

Why not try someone different in evaluating dispensational teaching?

Dr. David L. Cooper, Biblical Research Society Founder.
<biblicalresearchstudiesgroup>, I think is the address.

Have fun, as some other wag quipped.

BenOne

:nod:wave

Thanks, BenOne. I did a quick browse, looks interesting. Will take more time later to read in more depth. :thumb

[Elect1]

Yep, you got it. Its CT and Replacement theology aren't the same. Rather than having the church replay Israel, CT teaches that God always had one people saved by grace. In the OT he used the Jews as his means to evangelize the world and the NT he uses his church. Both the saints of the OT and NT were/are saved by grace through faith in the Messiah, Jesus. All of Israel refers to spiritual Israel - that is - both Jews and Gentiles that have faith in Jesus.

To expound on this, think of it as a pendulum; God's people primarily consisted of elect Jews in the OT. In the NT the pendulum has swung the other way to primarily consist of elect Gentiles. In the future (and this will be a sign of the end) the pendulum will swing back to the Jews as it says in Romans 11:26.

To reinforce this with Scripture (mainly that God has and will always have one people and one plan for His people) note the following:

Rom 9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.

Eph 3:6 {to be specific,} that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel,

Eph 2:11-19 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands—remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,

Notice here especially the Gentiles were "strangers to the covenants of promise" and are now grafted into the ONE olive tree (Rom 11:17-19) as seen below:

Rom 11:17-19 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in."

There are not 2 olive trees with 2 different plans. There is ONE olive tree which consist of the "fellow citizens" of the "covenants of promise" (Eph 2:11-19). Notice Israel has not been replaced but has been expanded to include the world (John 3:16).

[Mentat]

:thumb

[Beth O]

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.

Those that teach Covenant Theology are all over the place in their beliefs, just as those that teach dispensations are all over the place in their beliefs. I was just reading this article today and thought I would share what is said about Covenant Theology.

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/studybible-dispensation.html

The opposite of Dispensational Theology is Covenant Theology. This is the standard Presbyterian theology. It is also called Reformed and Federal Theology. It can be traced back to the time of the Heidelberg Catechism of 1584 and was encapsulated within the Westminster Confession one hundred years later. As would be expected, there is considerable variety within Covenant Theology traditions, but the following are some of the standard characteristics:

1. Covenant Theology says that there were only two covenants. Traditional Covenant Theology says there was a covenant of works before the Fall and a covenant of grace since the Fall, a covenant of works with Adam and a covenant of grace with Christ. The Westminster Confession stated, “The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ.” Another variety of covenant theology, called New Covenant Theology, says that the two covenants are the old covenant of law with Israel and the new covenant of grace with the church.

2. Covenant Theology claims that the Old Testament prophecies pertaining to Israel have already been fulfilled spiritually or allegorically or symbolically in the church. Covenant theologians believe that Israel has been permanently rejected.

3. Covenant Theology says there has been only one group of redeemed people: Israel in the Old Testament times and now the church, which supposedly has replaced Israel.

4. Covenant Theology has traditionally been accompanied by the practice of infant baptism, which is seen as the entrance into God’s new covenant. They argue that since the old covenant had the rite of circumcision for babies, the new covenant must have the rite of baby baptism.

That's weird because you don't see examples of this in the Bible, (babies being baptized). The example that we see is belief and then baptized.

This author, although a dispensationalist goes into dangers of dispensation teaching. (Hyper-dispensationalism).

This author suggests Harry A. Ironside's "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth" He deals largely with the error of Bullingerism.

http://www.brethrenonline.org/books/ultrad.htm

[Elect1]

Thanks for sharing the link. I just wanted to address some things in the article if you don't mind! The article you reference states the following in regard to several denominations:

I am referring especially to Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Reformed, and Lutheran denominations...They teach that Israel was permanently rejected by God and replaced with the church, that the church is the continuation of Israel. They do not believe that the Old Testament promises and prophecies pertaining to Israel will be literally fulfilled. They, too, in one degree or another have adopted certain rituals from the Old Testament dispensation, such as priests, elaborate ceremonies or “liturgy,” infant baptism (which they claim is the spiritualizing of infant circumcision), candles, incense, etc.

Presbyterian and Reformed churches follow what is called the "regulative principal of worship." This principle simply states that whatever is not specifically prescribed in Scripture for worship is forbidden. There are no "elaborate ceremonies", candles, or incense. They are very "plain" services.

Also, as stated in my previous post, they do not teach Israel was permanently rejected and replaced. The many verses I quoted previously specifically state the inclusion of Gentiles which is what CT's believe. I'm not denying that you could find some quotes on the internet stating otherwise (there's always at least one out there!), but am saying that it is far from typical in orthodox circles. In fact, historic premillenialism is not uncommon in Presby/Reformed churches.

The statements on infant baptism you quote are... well... I'm not quite sure what the author means.:idunno This is not the Presby/Reformed view though!

Check out some authors who hold to CT for some good information on the position. Kim Riddlebarger is one of the best I have found (http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/) :thumb He has a whole sermon series on Revelation!