Related to Spiritual Abraham

[Mentat]

I am going to review the scriptures and do some more study on the passages that you (Carolyn and Greg) have noted.

I am not sure if I am in the Disp. or CT camp. (Althought, the views in either camp are varied) I disagree with replacement CT as well as Disp. that have two economies for Jew and Gentiles. God is immutable and I don't understand a doctrine that -- to some extent -- says that God changed His mind. To me there are two groups of people, elect and non-elect. Elect being the "people of God".

At least, that is my views up to now, and I am willing to let them change, subject to scripture. (sola scriptura)

Thanks for your posts!

[gregbed]

I am going to review the scriptures and do some more study on the passages that you (Carolyn and Greg) have noted.

I am not sure if I am in the Disp. or CT camp. (Althought, the views in either camp are varied) I disagree with replacement CT as well as Disp. that have two economies for Jew and Gentiles. God is immutable and I don't understand a doctrine that -- to some extent -- says that God changed His mind. To me there are two groups of people, elect and non-elect. Elect being the "people of God".

At least, that is my views up to now, and I am willing to let them change, subject to scripture. (sola scriptura)

Thanks for your posts!

I am sure your study will be fruitful. I would encourage you in patience, it takes time. It took almost 2 years from the time I started asking questions to get to the point of at least staking out some pretty certain boundaries.
I wouldn't call myself a covenant theologian because 1.) I don't hold to infant baptism and 2.) I think the way it is often presented tends to flatten the differences between the old and the new covenants making little of which the Bible makes much. No reformed or covenant theologian would refer to themselves as "replacement" theologians - that is a pejorative used by those who disagree with reformed theology. I don't think Israel was replaced by the Church, but rather the Church was made part of Israel.

May God richly bless your study. If I may be of any help from my perspective feel free to send me a PM or E-mail.

Greg

[Mentat]

I am sure your study will be fruitful.

Thanks.

I wouldn't call myself a covenant theologian because 1.) I don't hold to infant baptism

Darn Augustine and the Pelagians! I would agree that baptism is only for those who can understand and profess their faith. It is not a main point or a homogenous issue in CT.

No reformed or covenant theologian would refer to themselves as "replacement" theologians - that is a pejorative used by those who disagree with reformed theology. I don't think Israel was replaced by the Church, but rather the Church was made part of Israel.

Agree

May God richly bless your study. If I may be of any help from my perspective feel free to send me a PM or E-mail.

Thanks for the offer - I have been trying to get a clearly defined view on CT vs. Disp. but everything I read is biased to one side and makes a straw man of the other viewpoint.



I think, depending on what specific points you hold, even CT and Disp. is an "in-house" debate. The main issues are the nature of God and salvation through Christ. We (all Christians) should focus on the primary issues that we should all agree upon. :yeah

[antitox]

Sing4Him,

It's quite simple. Rom 9:07 states that "children of the promise" (RSV) are reckoned as his (Abraham's) descendants. Just as Abraham lived by faith, and was deemed righteous, so are we.

It's believing in faith, and God chooses to liken us the same way as he was.