Featured Dispensational Understanding of the New Covenant... 3 views

Is this where we stand?

1. the church has no legal relationship to or participation in the new covenant. The Traditional Dispensational view.
2. the church has an indirect relationship to the NC The Progressive Dispensational view, the church is grafted in.
3. the church has a direct relationship to the NC The Covenant Theology view, replacement theology.

 

Impressive, you equate God's elect with an occultist and an atheist. Let everyone observe what you have done.

 

Where do you stand?

 

Note the total absence of truth in this Calvinists posts. Here is what I said.
Brilliant! Hitler and Stalin were both wrong but in different ways. Thanks for the insight.

The question is why would professing Christians deliberately misrepresent others, if not due to a feeble minded effort to defend false doctrine? There is no limit on the number of views that are wrong because Covenant Theology is wrong, no matter how you slice it.

1. The church has no legal relationship to or participation in the new covenant. The Traditional Dispensational view.
2. The church has an indirect relationship to the NC The Progressive Dispensational view, the church is grafted in.
3. The church has a direct relationship to the NC The Covenant Theology view, replacement theology.

 

Where do you stand?

 

I am a Progressive Dispensationalist. Therefore I wholeheartedly accept Galatians 3.

 

Everyone wholeheartedly accepts Galatians 3. Not everyone recognizes that Paul is comparing the Abrahamic Covenant with the Mosaic Covenant in relation to redemption.

 

Please stop posting nonsense, traditional dispensationalists rewrite Galatians 3.

 

Everyone wholeheartedly accepts Galatians 3. Not everyone recognizes that Paul is comparing the Abrahamic Covenant with the Mosaic Covenant in relation to redemption.

This is not nonsense. If you actually read Galatians 3 you will see Paul addressing both the Mosaic Covenant and the Abrahamic Covenant as it relates to the church.

 

Again, CT does not accept Galatians 3, they "spiritualize it!!"

 

No spiritualizing needed. The comparison between the Abrahamic covenant and Mosaic covenant runs literally through the entire chapter.

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith— just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”? Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. To give a human example, brothers:even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one. Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.
~ Galatians 3:1-29

 

Seldom have I seen a thread so totally hijacked from the OP.

 

Those that hold others in contempt are so holy...

 

Nope, as see Church as spiritual Israel under the NC!

 

under ?

 

Which of those was Calvin, and spurgeon then?

 

Both were wrong

 

Y1 does not present traditional Covenant Theology, but seems to be substituting NCT.

 

And you are more right then both of them were in theology?

 

Van, please stop looking for the law...