What is covenant theology? What is dispensationalism? I read so many different things concerning this issue. Some say that the old covenant was replaced by the new. Others say that there was always one covenant, and others say that Jews are still saved by means of the old, while Christians are saved by the new one. Can somebody clear all this up?

Dispensationalism


(from a protestant website)

IMHO, there are difficulties that protestants don't realize in reconciling dispensational theology with divine attributes.

Does the Church teach that Jews can still be saved by means of the old covenant?

Absolutely not. They could never be saved by the old covenant, as only grace saves, not law.

To answer your earlier questions, the old covenant was fulfilled in the new. The "people of God " of the old covenant (the faithful Jews, or "spiritual" Israel) were replaced by the "people of God" of the New covenant (the Church).

The only thing the Jews have to look forward to now is their conversion to the Catholic faith. Every other hope they have is in vain. As long as they remian outside the true Faith, they are just as doomed as anyone else.

Dispensationalism makes the deadly error of thinking the Church does not replace Israel, and that God still has a running covenant with the Jews. That's why they hope for a Jewish theocracy from Jerusalem, with Jesus reigining for 1,000 years.

btw I have several articles on dispensationalism at
http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/ Just click on "Dispensationalism"

I want to clarify something I said in the previous post as it can be easily misunderstood.


I said

"Replaced" is perhaps not the right word as it could be interpreted to mean the faithful Jews were kicked out of the people of God. They weren't, since they became followers of Jesus. It is more accurate to say the faithful Jews were incorporated into the new people of God, the Church. National, unbelieving, apostate Israel was strictly speaking replaced, but Christ-believing Jews were incorporated into the new people of God.

Dispensationalists will constantly tell you that the New Testament writers distinguish the terms "Church" and "Israel" and so the Church can't be replacing Israel. What these dispensationalists fail to note, however, is that there is a very strong distinction between believing Israel (including the Jews who believed) and apostate Israel (the Jews who didn't believe). The term Church is used interchangeably with believing Israel, but not apostate Israel. This is a crucial error of dispenationalism, because they lump all references to Israel together, thinking there is but one Israel, when in fact there are two.


I hope this helps.

Yes, what do they do with the phrase synagogue of satan used several times in Scripture? Who else could that title belong to other than apostate Israel? The mysterious relationship between the two was forshadowed by Scripture in the persons of Ishmael and Isaac; Esau and Jacob; and Cain and Abel. Each relationship reveals something about the mystery of the Jews and the Catholic Church.

Yes, it's very true that the Church and the non-Christian Jews are foreshadowed through allegories of the lives and deeds of Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, and Cain and Abel. But then, there are also certain uncomfortable things that such allegories might convey. Like that part about Jacob (the Catholic Church?) using unjust and immoral means to try to steal the birthright from unworthy Esau (the Jews?). And the fact that, to our great shame, over the centuries far too many Catholics have acted like Cain in their relations and attitude toward unbelieving Jews, when they should have emulated Abel.

As for the question of what dispensationalists do with the Book of Revelation's reference to "the synagogue of Satan," I really don't know, but I can relate what the Worldwide Church of God (a sect with dispensationalist tendencies if not actually dispensationalist) did with them. The WCG used to claim that "synagogue of Satan" referred to Samaritan synagogues as a symbol of Gnosticism, which the early Fathers traced back to the teachings and activity of the Samaritan sorceror Simon Magus. One could argue that, because the half-Jewish/half-pagan Samaritans sometimes claimed to be Jews when it was advantageous for them to do so, but claimed to be Gentiles when it was not, the Samaritans could be "those who claim to be Jews and are not, but do lie." Under that interpretation, the letters to the seven churches would presumably have been referring to conflict with early Gnostic heretics.

That, however, is not how "synagogue of Satan" has traditionally been understood. It is rather seen as a reference to Jews who reject their Messiah and persecute the Church. Thus, the letters to the seven churches would be referring to the persecution that the early Church suffered at the hands of unbelieving Jews. As St. Paul wrote, not all Israel are truly Israel, and he is a Jew who is one inwardly, whose circumcision is of the heart rather than of the flesh. Thus, Jews who reject Christ would be "those who claim to be Jews and are not," though it may perhaps be argued that such Jews aren't "lying," at least not consciously so. The Samaritans, on the other hand, certainly did knowingly lie about their status as Jews. I suppose you could make either interpretation work, though the one with the longest pedigree is the "synagogue of Satan" = "unbelieving Jews hostile to the Jews" interpretation, and that's a weighty consideration indeed.

The allegory of Jacob and Esau was to reveal that the election of God is not based upon forseen merits or demerits or according to "works". Essentially, it is based soley upon the divine predilection and good will of God. That is what the story conveys as it regards Israel and the Church of Christ. It is in reference to predestination and what it means to be a true "Israelite", of which election is not based upon merit (this doctrine is in perfect accord with the Thomist doctrine of predestination). Whatever wrongs Jacob may or may not have committed in his lifetime is not the point for there is hardly ever a perfect one-to-one correspondence in allegory and typology. Moses was a type of Christ, but it does not follow that Moses' failings must correspond to Christ. We are seeing rather a universal and substantial identity, or archtype, typified and then fulfilled at a later time, which reveals or clarifies some mystery of God and His dealings with men. There is probably some formula, method or exegetical technique regarding types and antitypes that addresses this problem.

Yeah, I think you're right that there's some sort of technique to deal with it. I just don't know enough about these things yet to be able to say what it is.

Duh. That should have been "hostile to the Church," not hostile to the Jews.

If you want to know anything about covenants, you should obtain book by Dr. Scott Hahn titled "A Father Who Keeps His Promises". His Doctoral Thesisi is all about the covenants in the bible. Hope this helps.

jeremiah 31:31-32
31) "The time is coming, " declares the LORD,"when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.
32) It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, declares the Lord.

romans 11:26-28
26) And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
"The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27) And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.
28) As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs.

the Lord Jesus Christ brought in this new covenant at his death and resurrection. Jesus---a JEW--and the 12 apostles--all jews--established the beginning of the new covenant church that was now including gentiles--or jewish term "goy"---for nations.

It is important to remember some jews followed JESUS--some did not----and as the promise to abraham(abrahamic covenant) and the promise to david(davidic covenant)---JESUS is the fullfillment of the old testament(torah)--jewish term for o.t is tanakh---it did not abolish the tanakh(o.t)---JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD IS THE FULFILLMENT OF IT.

when our LORD JESUS CHRIST comes again---to the mount of olives in jerusalem---the jews will recognize him as their MESSIAH--hebrew term for the greek CHRIST, and then they will receive the new covenant and be our equal brothers in JESUS/YESHUA--the hebrew for JESUS.

God does not renege or lie.... HE will fullfill all promises to abraham and david---both the spiritual of faith---and the fleshly for israels sake---SO ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED---as it says in romans...

Um, I hope the Jews recognise Jesus as their Messiah BEFORE He returns -- because when He returns, it will be too late for anyone to change their minds about Him. Characters in a play do not continue their storylines when the Playwright appears on the stage at the end of the play. The time for Jews to accept their Messiah is now, not after this world has come to an end.

the world doesnt come to an end at the LORDS 2nd coming----

the day of redemption is now---that is correct---because there is no gaurentee that one will survive the great tribulation---or even make it there.

but at JESUS CHRISTS return---he will set up his 1000 year messianic or millenial kingdom---and there CHRIST will reign with all believers as leaders and at the end of the 1000 year reign is the great white throne judgement where satan and death are finally thrown into the lake of fire with all the people who did not accept JESUS CHRIST as LORD.

this 2nd coming will be where Israel will receive the new covenant talked about in jeremiah 31---an which believers now live---

then comes NEW JERUSALEM---where God IS ALL IN ALL---and HE will walk amongst us again like he did in the garden....

some of the important covenants in the bible...

Eternal covenant---hebrews 13:20 talks about the covenant of redemption of God before time began

adamic covenant---gen 3:14-19--the covenant of mans condition on earth---and the promise to redeem

noahic covenant---gen 8:20-9:6- the covenant that preserves life and one of human government

abrahamic covenant---gen 12:1-3 and 13:14-17, 15:1-7,17:1-8---the covenant of blessing, the seed of abraham and the "promise"

mosaic covenant---exodus 20:1-31,31:18
legal,mosaic-levitical covenant given to israel and laws pertaining to life----this is the "shadow" of JESUS CHRIST---as the writer of the book of hebrews mentions in 10:1

palestinian covenant--deut 30:1-10---the covenant showing Israels claim to the promised land

davidic covenant---2 sam 7:4-17, 1chron 17:4-15
the covenant of kingdom life---brought through the "son of david" ---JESUS CHRIST

new covenant ---jeremiah 31:31-33, mark 14:24, matthew 26:28---the covenant of millenial(1000 year) blessings for Israel----and the gentiles who believe(non-jews)

the gospel of matthew is about the "son of david" and is about the "kingdom of heaven" on earth---how we today as believers are to live---and how the govt and everyday life in the 1000 year kingdom of CHRIST at his 2nd coming will be.

Mark, I think you might gain some insight by reading a book such as David Currie's Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind.

It will indeed be too late when Jesus returns to judge all (particular and/or general) - just as it's too late after your phycial death. We are living in the Kingdom of God at this time. Though you are certainly right that those who do not accept Jesus the Christ and His revelation throught His Church will indeed be in a very tough spot.

Mark,

firstly, welcome to the board.

I find it odd you refer to Jeremiah 31:31-33, Mark 14:24, Matthew 26:28 in support of a 1,000 year millennial reign when none of these passages says any such thing.

If you get a chance, be sure to have a look at my articles at

http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/disp/dispindex.html

cheers,
Sean.

Well, when I read the Olivet prophecies, the parables of Jesus, and the Book of Revelation, it certainly sounds like the world will end when Jesus returns.



The 1,000-year Messianic Kingdom was established in 33 A.D. It is wrong to take Rev. 20 literally when it is obviously a symbolic vision. It makes more sense to see the 1,000 years as representing the restoration of human nature in Christ. Notice that the Antediluvian Patriarchs commonly lived to be 900 years old or more. Adam died just 70 years shy of 1,000. Methushelah died 41 years shy of 1,000. No one ever made it to a millennium. But in Christ, we Christians can receive the restoration of all things that were damaged or destroyed by original sin. Thus, after the first resurrection, the resurrection of Jesus, we can live and reign with Christ for a thousand years. Not a literal thousands years, but a symbolic thousand years, meaning we get back what Adam lost, and then some.

This interpretation is supported by the Jewish tradition found in the Book of Jubilees, where it say that in the Messianic Reign, mankind's lifespan will increase to 1,000 years. That's the first time we ever see "1,000 years" associated with the Messianic Kingdom. That's the background against which we must read St. John's vision in Rev. 20.

thanx for the welcome sean---

I used the jeremiah, mark and matthew verses to support "when all israel will be saved" in romans, when Israel will accept the new covenant.
today ---believers should be living the life of the kingdom---but other passages support we are not living "kingdom of heaven" now.
there is still death, the lamb does not lay next to the lion, etc....

the fact the new covenant Israel will accept lasts a thousand years is only based on revelation 20:3
He threw him into the abyss and locked and sealed it over him,to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years(millenial-greek for 1000) were ended.

if this was meant to be spiritaul--as the following post to yours claims---than the life adam, enoch and methusaleh were "spiritaul" also---I do not hold that view.

God talks to us personally in our everyday walk---there is no reason for him to talk to us only spiritually or symblically in the word the apostles"died" for to keep for our sake.

concerning the olivet discourse---we should be living today the "kingdom of heaven", but for israel future---all israel is not saved yet---but they will be at the 2nd coming when JESUS sets up the "kingom of heaven" on earth where HE will reign and sit upon the throne of david.

right now OUR LORD sits at the right hand---but when he comes again---to keep the promise to david---the davidic covenant---he will reign 1000 years where there will be ---no more tears- all nature will be in harmony with man as it was in the garden.

at the end of the millenial kingdom---NEW JERUSALEM(rev 21 and 22) will come down and God will create new heavens and a new earth....

there will be no sun---because the FATHER IS THE LIGHT and the LAMB ITS CANDLEHOLDER.

these things are just as literal as lazarus rising from the dead, blind bartimeus being given sight, or God making something form nothing.

God can do it and will---cause he promised he would in his word.

hello polycarp----
your name sounds familiar--

the messianic kingdom---which is a better used term than millenial because it shows why the kingdom has to come----to fulfill both the abrahamic and davidic covenants of the jewish MESSIAH---JESUS.

I will say i do not hold to the only a spiritaul meaning of a literal phrase or group of words.

as far as using jewish traditional midrash/talmud----those are oral traditions written down and are still only mans opinion---they are NOT inspired.
the talmud was intended to be what it means--oral torah---but after the destruction of the temple in 70 a.d---at the council of javne---rabbinical judaism made major changes out of necessity.
worship now centered on local synagogue because the temple was destroyed.
the septuagint texts prevalent in the days of JESUS, were no longer allowed as inspired---WHY---because followers of the "nazarene" used the septuagint scrolls.
the followers of the nazarene were considered traitors(all 1st followers and most new followers of JESUS were jewish), and were regarded with such low regard only moslems today hold a lower one....

I do not hold to rabbinical judaism because true judaism---messianic judaism----beleif in the MESSIAH/CHRIST---is in the form of christianity today.

dont get alarmed or sidetracked by terminology...

Christ is greek
MESSIAH is hebrew....

a messianic jew---is a hebrew christian----but you do realize how traditional and proud that jews are---they from birth are taught that non-jews(the "goy"--including greeks) are pagan.
so jewish christians just keep up the pattern and call themselves MESSIANIC jews

these are also known as hebrew christians, completed jews, jewish christian, etc.....

we must be careful when we communicate what we mean in terminology.

these messianic jews to you and me are christian.

I am not trying to start a argument

just keeping to the theme of the thread---and coming here to post and to learn what rcc and other catholics believe is why i have come.

I will let you know I am a frequent poster on zola levitts board, and that there are some debates about rcc beliefs that are not represented very good, and 2 or 3 posters bash the rcc much. I am not one of those----though I will admit I dont hold to everything rcc doctrine does----

anyway---I thought it might be best to let some know here 2 posters from zola have taken up a "challenge" by a poster here to come and "reveal the sick rcc doctrine"-----I decided to come and make sure they dont use zola's name or try to represent non-rcc believers in a bad manner.

aliva96---who is a member of the rcc and a MODERATOR on zola---is HIGHLY respected and is accepted by most on zola as a equal brother---though he does defend his faith EXCEPTIONALLY WELL.

only the "rabble" will give him a hard time---and most of us get sick and tired of it----I've decided to come and be a "opposing" and unyoked supporter of these 2 or 3 posters.....

perhaps you and others can let this boards moderators know about what I said....

and maybe some here can come and visit zola's sight---perhaps both boards can visit one another on a routine basis without being disruptive, and then we can see each others views and, although not having to accept or follow the others views---at least RESPECT THE OTHER PERSON...

todays society and younger generation have zero respect for anything, anybody----not even themselves in most cases.

peace of CHRIST be with you...
mark