The Facts and Flaws of Covenant Theology Part Three
If Replacement Theology is true, then certainly God has an opinion about it—one He states clearly and teaches visibly in Scripture. Conversely, if it is not plainly taught, then Replacement Theology must be the fictitious creation of men. What It Maintains Replacement Theology maintains that, because the Jewish people rejected Jesus Christ, God has replaced or superseded ethnic Israel with tGet More Articles—Subscribe Today!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!
I seem to be missing something here – no arguments with the article proving that Israel has not been replaced; but the title of the article is “flaws with Covenant Theology.” Could you please provide some explanation to demonstrate that the two are related? Some of the sources I have looked at so far contends that they are in fact different doctrines, some that covenant theology engenders replacement theology – but neither side have done anything to argue their position. Answers, please?
While I enjoyed this write-up very much and it was thoughtfully and professionally done, I don’t understand what you mean at the end when you say “all references to the church refer to the church in its broadest sense, including Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, and evangelical”. I would think that the statement would more correctly read, “all references to the CHURCH refers to that body of believers – those who have put their faith and trust in Christ, whatever their denomination is…” Is that not a more accurate description sir?