Covenant Theology: What’s in It for Israel?
Covenant Theology (as opposed to Dispensational Theology, which is what we believe) is a system that attempts to develop the Bible’s philosophy of history on the basis of two or three covenants. It represents the whole of Scripture and history as being covered by these covenants. Covenant Theology did not begin as a system until the 16th and 17th centuries. It did not develop in the early chuGet More Articles—Subscribe Today!
New Digital & Archive Subscription Options!
Digital Subscriptions are only $9.99/year. Digital + Archive Subscriptions are only $19.99/year.
First-time digital subscriber? Get a FREE, one-year trial at foi.org/digital!
Historically, but particularly in the first century A.D., did or does a Jew lose his/her connection with “Israel” upon conversion? I ask this because James writes his Epistle to the “12 tribes scattered abroad.”
Now, Ishmael had 12 sons. Perhaps James is addressing them…?
But in the second chapter of that same Epistle James says – loosely here, I don’t have the passage in front of me – “…my brethren (from ch.1:1) have not your faith in the Lord Jesus with respect of persons.”
Believing Jews no longer identify as Israel? Not even the branches NOT broken off in Romans 11?
From the moment of Christ’s ascension in Acts 1 to the time of Cornelius (et al.) conversion in Acts 10 the church comprised Jews exclusively. Where’s the distinction between the church and Israel in that configuration? Moreover, Paul makes it clear that believing Gentiles are graft in among believing Jews in Romans 11:17; that the middle wall of partition has been broken down and that one new man has been formed in Christ, comprising Jews and Gentiles; that Gentiles are no longer aliens and strangers but are members now of the commonwealth of Israel as fellow-partakers, etc. (Eph. 2-3). It might also be noted that when Stephen talks about the “congregation in the wilderness” (Acts 7) the Greek work rendered congregation happens to be ekklesia, and wouldn’t you know it, that’s the same word rendered “church” in the NT. The writer to the Hebrews cites the OT, “In the midst of the congregation will I sing your praise…” Yeah, ekklesia.
It should also be pointed out that Paul, in what is an entirely overlooked or ignored passage by my Dispensationalist brothers, draws a distinction within/among Israelites: “…they are not all Israel who are Israel.” Earlier in that same Epistle he declared that if those who are of the Law (Jews qua Jews alone) are heirs of the promises of God, faith is void and the promise is of none effect. In Galatians where he equates present Jerusalem and her children and categorically states that the son of the bondwoman (in context, physical descendants of Jacob who have rejected the Gospel) will NOT be an heir with the son of the free.
Lastly, how anyone can read the Letter to the Hebrews and conclude that the new covenant (yes, Jeremiah’s new covenant…31:31) has NOT been enacted and established on better promises, despite the writer’s declaring that categorically simply betrays the obfuscation that has resulted from the sycophantic glorying in Jewish flesh, aka, Dispensationalism.
Dr. Showers makes one very glaring error in his otherwise excellent article. The “gospel of the kingdom” is no different from the gospel of 1 Corinthians 15. Otherwise it wouldn’t and couldn’t be called the “eternal gospel” in Revelation 14:6. Covenant theology is filled with errors and its system of beliefs, teaching and origin is one major reason I’m getting ready to exit a facebook discussion group I’m in, Christian Apologetics. The vast majority of members hold to reformed, covenant theology and are hyper-Calvinists.