What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Covenant Theology vs. Dispensational Theology

Which is your preferred view?

  • Dispensational Theology

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Covenant Theology

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • New Covenant Theology

    Votes: 5 71.4%

  • Other (I will explain)

    Votes: 2 28.6%
  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .
Cyberseeker

Cyberseeker

Member
Below is a brief comparison showing the main differences between covenant theology and dispensational theology. These are the two prevailing (and contrary) views concerning Israel and the Church. There is a 3rd view called 'New Covenant' theology, and, if you are of that persuasion, feel free to explain it here.

Anyway, here are the main views. Please vote on the poll.

Dispensational Theology
  1. God has two distinct people – Israel and the Church.
  2. The Church age was a parenthesis in God’s dealing with Israel.
  3. God’s promises to Israel were postponed till after the rapture.
  4. After a Jewish tribulation revival, their ‘dispensation’ will resume.
  5. Worship in the millennium includes re-instituted temple sacrifice.
  6. The promised temple is an example of what must yet be fulfilled.
  7. Modern Israel proves not all promises are fulfilled in the Church.
Covenant Theology
  1. God has always only had but one spiritual people.
  2. The Church (incl. Jew & Gentile) actually is true Israel.
  3. God’s promises to Israel are fulfilled in Christ’s Church.
  4. There will be a revival of Jews but it will be into the Church.
  5. Redemption is in the cross and sacrifice is finished forever.
  6. Even if a temple gets rebuilt it is unnecessary and irrelevant.
  7. The modern restoration of the nation of Israel is coincidental.
 
Cyberseeker said:
Below is a brief comparison showing the main differences between covenant theology and dispensational theology. These are the two prevailing (and contrary) views concerning Israel and the Church. There is a 3rd view called 'New Covenant' theology, and, if you are of that persuasion, feel free to explain it here.

Anyway, here are the main views. Please vote on the poll.

Dispensational Theology
  1. God has two distinct people – Israel and the Church.
  2. The Church age was a parenthesis in God’s dealing with Israel.
  3. God’s promises to Israel were postponed till after the rapture.
  4. After a Jewish tribulation revival, their ‘dispensation’ will resume.
  5. Worship in the millennium includes re-instituted temple sacrifice.
  6. The promised temple is an example of what must yet be fulfilled.
  7. Modern Israel proves not all promises are fulfilled in the Church.
Covenant Theology
  1. God has always only had but one spiritual people.
  2. The Church (incl. Jew & Gentile) actually is true Israel.
  3. God’s promises to Israel are fulfilled in Christ’s Church.
  4. There will be a revival of Jews but it will be into the Church.
  5. Redemption is in the cross and sacrifice is finished forever.
  6. Even if a temple gets rebuilt it is unnecessary and irrelevant.
  7. The modern restoration of the nation of Israel is coincidental.
Click to expand...

Concerning Covenant Theology -

1. Always is defined as starting when ? The Church as a Nation, a people group, or called out ones began with Abraham.

2. The True Israel is Jesus, and includes those who are In Christ.

3. The True Israel is Body of Christ, with Jesus as the Head.

4. There is no other Salvation except in Jesus Christ, and being in Him.

5. Agreed

6. The Temple is necessary and relevant in exposing those who would believe the strong delusion sent by God.

7. The Modern restoration of Israel is a fulfillment of Prophecy. Amos 9:14-15 Jeremiah 16:14-15



JLB
 
Was raised dispensational and most of what I believe leans towards that, but also some in covenanental theology.

Basically, I see Israel as God's Kingdom type and framework, very carnal, to build a spiritual one of new, resurrected men and women like him when the time was to come. The church are the initial called out ones, in which those of Israel in the flesh still have the promises and will likewise experience the covenant in Christ later. The earthly promises to Israel are still in effect which are part of the plan to bring forth the end result, but by extension spiritual ones which both work together for God's purpose. I see salvation of anyone as the end result of eternal life and entry to the Kingdom, so the church now is being saved and called out to rule and reign with Christ. The rest of the people, be it the Israeites, the Jews, and the rest of the world will be saved later, just as there's some Israelites, Jews and Gentiles being called now to become the church.

Much like the tribes of Israel, and how God set up that government, I see the church as "Judah and Levi" so-to-speak since they are Kings and priests being trained now, and the rest to be saved later as the remaining tribes of people of the Kings and priests so that the Kingdom to come has the same framework as typified the way God set up Israel. The people and government of God can be seen in Israel as a whole, and his redemptive plan in the feasts given to them. The rest of the law pointed to Christ and the kingdom by the ceremonies involved.

Since I believe in elements of both, and neither would make sense without the other, this is why people can explain dispensational vs covenental theology to me a million times, and I will never grasp or understand each by itself -- makes no sense to me. One's the trunk of the elephant, and the other's the ear.
 
One other thing.... I see too pure covenental theology as a start of replacement theology, and then the phenomenon of Israel (for want of a better word) is a past event, something merely to give us lessons instead of an integral on-going part of God's plan to the ultimate Kingdom. It makes the bible too "Gentilized" IMO, and gives Israel a minimal role (after all, do you see in most church's creed 'what we believe' much if anything about Israel?) Yet..... the bible is a book about Israel. To miss that means a person misses the whole point of the bible and creates their own understanding in place of it.
 
honestly, "theology" in its larger percentage has not been quite the correct concept (and that because of the human factor), more correct is to be careful not to hurry and not to be wrong in the findings, the conclusions and the decisions as to the things of God and faith, because exactly the repentance is the given principled and systematic way for the believers in this regard, while the spiritual/religious science (regardless of whether called "theology" or another) has many times turned out to be according to human traditions as though without things of God and faith having always been fully proved, let's take for example the traditional belief/persuasion that (ostensibly) God created the evil, but if we try to earnestly reflect on that, we will be able to conclude that if God created the evil, then He would be responsible/to blame for that, and then everyone would be able to state that the fault is His and even to judge Him, so if we really prefer, want and choose to be true without deception, then we should admit that God is not sinful nor a creator of evil, otherwise we would make Him out to be a liar

1 John 1:1-10 "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full. This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If(i.e. and if in such circumstances i.e. when we sin) we say that we have no sin(i.e. or if we, juxtaposing God and men, say that not the humans are sinful), we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If(i.e. but if in such circumstances) we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If(i.e. yet if in such circumstances) we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

so the human tradition should not be a reason for us to sin

Blessings
 
JLB said:
Concerning Covenant Theology -

1. Always is defined as starting when ? The Church as a Nation, a people group, or called out ones began with Abraham.
Click to expand...

God has always only had but one spiritual people. Started before Cain and Abel I presume. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it was offered in faith. The 'people of God' were always those who lived by faith.
 
Cyberseeker said:
God has always only had but one spiritual people. Started before Cain and Abel I presume. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it was offered in faith. The 'people of God' were always those who lived by faith.
Click to expand...

The Church as a Nation, a people group, or called out ones began with Abraham.


JLB
 
Cyberseeker said:
God has always only had but one spiritual people. Started before Cain and Abel I presume. Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it was offered in faith. The 'people of God' were always those who lived by faith.
Click to expand...


Can you list for us 2 or 3 major differences between Covenant Theology and New Covenant Theology?


JLB
 
Dispensationalists either infer or state that the entire levitical system will be repeated in the Millennium. Moderates think that it will simply serve as a ‘reminder’ of Christ’s death. Extreme dispensationalists infer that it will be the basis of millennium atonement. In either case all disps. accord an elite position to ethnic Israel in the millennium.

I agree that option #2 is the better version, but its adherents tend to overlook the possibility that God may have orchestrated the modern gathering of Israel for the purpose of bringing them together for another chance of finding Jesus Messiah. (Romans 11:25-28)

'New Covenant Theology' seems the same as C.T. insofar as modern Israel is concerned, however it is very different in how it sees the law. Believers are under the 'law of Christ' - not the 10 commandments. This is a concept that is not well explained by bible teachers today, but it deserves our attention IMO.
 
Cyberseeker said:
'New Covenant Theology' seems the same as C.T. insofar as modern Israel is concerned, however it is very different in how it sees the law. Believers are under the 'law of Christ' - not the 10 commandments. This is a concept that is not well explained by bible teachers today, but it deserves our attention IMO.
Click to expand...

Both systems or all 3 try to figure out ways to eliminate the law to N.T. believers, no doubt.

But none of the 3 really understand the reasons for the law, coherently.

The "shortcut" method for the law was provided by Paul in Romans 13:8-10, and yes, Paul did place N.T. believers under the obligations therein stipulated, by his depiction of the law. Which also happens to match up identically to what Jesus said about same.
 
Any system teaching God will honor the blood of bulls again, in any way, shape or form, is a spit in the face of The Christ.
 
Technically I don't believe God ever honored the blood of bulls. I think He honored the kind of true faith in Him that led followers to try their best at obedience. But I don't see how the Father will ever return to desiring the wrote obedience of slaves when Jesus has provided the much better opportunity to become God's adopted sons through the Holy Spirit. Dispensationalism has many serious flaws that miss the real effects of Jesus' finished work.
 
If we being the Seed of Abraham, then we all enter into the same boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top