Any Here believe in New Covenant Theology?

[37818]

Replacement Theology

The false teaching the church is the new Israel.
The truth is New Covenant was given to Israel, Hebrews 8:10-12. Saved Isreal is a part of the New Covenant church. But the church is not Israel. See Revelation 21:12-14. Ephesians 2:12.

 

[Yeshua1]

The false teaching the church is the new Israel.
The truth is New Covenant was given to Israel, Hebrews 8:10-12. Saved Isreal is a part of the New Covenant church. But the church is not Israel. See Revelation 21:12-14. Ephesians 2:12.

I see that saved jews and Hentiles make up the Church, spiritual israel, but that God will in the end times still deal with national Israel and bring them back to Yeshua as their messiah!

 

[Noah Hirsch]

The false teaching the church is the new Israel.
The truth is New Covenant was given to Israel, Hebrews 8:10-12. Saved Isreal is a part of the New Covenant church. But the church is not Israel. See Revelation 21:12-14. Ephesians 2:12.

The false teaching the church is the new Israel.
The truth is New Covenant was given to Israel, Hebrews 8:10-12. Saved Isreal is a part of the New Covenant church. But the church is not Israel. See Revelation 21:12-14. Ephesians 2:12.

But does either Covenant Theology or New Covenant Theology really teach Replacement Theology? I know that historic Covenant Theology does not really teach it, though some accuse Covenant Theologians as teaching Replacement Theology. I do not know about New Covenant Theology. Is it possible that it is really a misunderstanding, a misrepresentation, or perversion of New Covenant Theology to say that the church is the new Israel. As someone who has more in common with classic Covenant Theology I believe that the church is the Israel of God, (Galatians 6:16) the true Israel, but I do not believe that the church is the new Israel. I do not believe in the existence of two peoples of God Israel and the church. I do not know whether or not New Covenant Theology teaches that Israel is the church rather than teaching that the church is the new Israel.

 

[37818]

. . . the Church, spiritual israel, . . .

I disagree, the church is not spiritual Israel period.

 

[37818]

But does either Covenant Theology or New Covenant Theology really teach Replacement Theology? I know that historic Covenant Theology does not really teach it, though some accuse Covenant Theologians as teaching Replacement Theology. I do not know about New Covenant Theology. Is it possible that it is really a misunderstanding, a misrepresentation, or perversion of New Covenant Theology to say that the church is the new Israel. As someone who has more in common with classic Covenant Theology I believe that the church is the Israel of God, (Galatians 6:16) the true Israel, but I do not believe that the church is the new Israel. I do not believe in the existence of two peoples of God Israel and the church. I do not know whether or not New Covenant Theology teaches that Israel is the church rather than teaching that the church is the new Israel.

'The Church has become “spiritual Israel.”'
https://www.theopedia.com/new-covenant-theology

 

[Noah Hirsch]

'The Church has become “spiritual Israel.”'
https://www.theopedia.com/new-covenant-theology

I would then, depart from New Covenant Theology on this point because I believe that the true Israel and the universal church signifies the same people, that the church existed under the old covenant, the covenant of Moses, and also before God gave that covenant to Israel on Mount Sinai. I believe that the church always was true spiritual Israel rather than that the church became Israel. If the church under the new covenant becomes Israel, then the church cannot be a continuation of the same people of God, of which Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, Hezekiah, David, Isaac, Jacob, Abel, Enoch, and others were all members, members of the same body and bride of Christ that we are.

 

[Marooncat79]

Throw some eggs, salt and pepper in and we could have a breakfast casserole

 

[37818]

. . . that the church existed under the old covenant . . .

We may disagree. I have the understanding, I maybe repeating this, the New Covenant was given to Israel and created the church. Saved Israel is part of the church, and the church is not israel. Now I agree the church began under the Old Covenant, but is the New Covenant creation.
John the Immersionist is an Old Covenant prophet and is a presenter of the New.

 

[Noah Hirsch]

We may disagree. I have the understanding, I maybe repeating this, the New Covenant was given to Israel and created the church. Saved Israel is part of the church, and the church is not israel. Now I agree the church began under the Old Covenant, but is the New Covenant creation.
John the Immersionist is an Old Covenant prophet and is a presenter of the New.

If Israel is not the church, then Jesus is the Christ/Messiah is not the Savior of any but ethic Israelites from their sins. It is evident that part of Jesus’ office as the Messiah is to be the Savior of His people, i.e. the true Israel.

“Then the Angel said vnto them, Be not afraide: for beholde, I bring you tidings of great ioye, that shal be to all the people: That is, that vnto you is born this day in the citie of Dauid, a Sauiour, which is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 1:10-11 GEN)

The angel announces tidings of great joy to whom? For whom his this glad tidings? To all the people. Who is this the people referred to that this glad tidings will be for all of? To whom does the angel say a Savior has been born for?

“And thou, babe, shalt be called the Prophete of the moste High: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord, to prepare his wayes, And to giue knowledge of saluatiõ vnto his people, by the remision of sinnes.” (Luke 1:76-77 GEN)

What is this people to whom the knowledge of salvation and forgiveness of sins is to be forgiven? Who are to be partaker of the forgiveness of sins? If we are not sons of Abraham by faith, then how can we have any benefit in Christ or partake in the forgiveness of sins that is in His name?

 

[Covenanter]

In the NCT, that tries to steer a middle pathway between reformed baptists and Dispy Ones?

The problem with call a novel theology "NCT" is that the New Covenant is is a relationship with God that ALL Christians are in. A relationship established & secured by the blood of Jesus shed at Calvary; a relationship remembered at every communion meal.

And of course all believers from Adam (?) onwards, regardless of any supposed dispensations were & are in a Covenant relationship with God.

 

[Mikey]

But does either Covenant Theology or New Covenant Theology really teach Replacement Theology? I know that historic Covenant Theology does not really teach it, though some accuse Covenant Theologians as teaching Replacement Theology. I do not know about New Covenant Theology. Is it possible that it is really a misunderstanding, a misrepresentation, or perversion of New Covenant Theology to say that the church is the new Israel. As someone who has more in common with classic Covenant Theology I believe that the church is the Israel of God, (Galatians 6:16) the true Israel, but I do not believe that the church is the new Israel. I do not believe in the existence of two peoples of God Israel and the church. I do not know whether or not New Covenant Theology teaches that Israel is the church rather than teaching that the church is the new Israel.

Replacement theology is a term which those who disagree with Covenant Theology (CT), and usually holds to Dispensationalism, to discribe Covenant Theology (CT). They see CT teaching that the Curch replaces Israel. However no one who holds to CT would use the tern, nor accept that accusation.

 

[Mikey]

The problem with call a novel theology "NCT" is that the New Covenant is is a relationship with God that ALL Christians are in. A relationship established & secured by the blood of Jesus shed at Calvary; a relationship remembered at every communion meal.

And of course all believers from Adam (?) onwards, regardless of any supposed dispensations were & are in a Covenant relationship with God.

maybe i mis understand what you are saying but i think you may understand what the term New Covenant Theology is in reference to.
New Covenant Theology is not in reference to the Theology of the New Covenant/Testament. Rather it is a New form of Covenant Theology. NCT is to differentiate itself from other and older forms of Covenant Theology that exist.
Thus, New Covenant Theology is to be read as New (Covenant Theology) rather than (New Covenant) Theology.

 

[Mikey]

But does either Covenant Theology or New Covenant Theology really teach Replacement Theology? I know that historic Covenant Theology does not really teach it, though some accuse Covenant Theologians as teaching Replacement Theology. I do not know about New Covenant Theology. Is it possible that it is really a misunderstanding, a misrepresentation, or perversion of New Covenant Theology to say that the church is the new Israel. As someone who has more in common with classic Covenant Theology I believe that the church is the Israel of God, (Galatians 6:16) the true Israel, but I do not believe that the church is the new Israel. I do not believe in the existence of two peoples of God Israel and the church. I do not know whether or not New Covenant Theology teaches that Israel is the church rather than teaching that the church is the new Israel.

Have you read anything on 1689 Federalism?

1689 Federalism

 

[Mikey]

All of those systems are Christians trying to piece together just what id the best approach to viewing the theology of the NC, and mine as of right now is 1689 federalist,, but do not discount any of them except for Hyper Cals and Hyper Dispy!

Im reading through some 1689 federalist books. Have you read Progressive Covenatalism?

 

[37818]

If Israel is not the church, then Jesus is the Christ/Messiah is not the Savior of any but ethic Israelites from their sins. It is evident that part of Jesus’ office as the Messiah is to be the Savior of His people, i.e. the true Israel.

“Then the Angel said vnto them, Be not afraide: for beholde, I bring you tidings of great ioye, that shal be to all the people: That is, that vnto you is born this day in the citie of Dauid, a Sauiour, which is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 1:10-11 GEN)

The angel announces tidings of great joy to whom? For whom his this glad tidings? To all the people. Who is this the people referred to that this glad tidings will be for all of? To whom does the angel say a Savior has been born for?

“And thou, babe, shalt be called the Prophete of the moste High: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord, to prepare his wayes, And to giue knowledge of saluatiõ vnto his people, by the remision of sinnes.” (Luke 1:76-77 GEN)

What is this people to whom the knowledge of salvation and forgiveness of sins is to be forgiven? Who are to be partaker of the forgiveness of sins? If we are not sons of Abraham by faith, then how can we have any benefit in Christ or partake in the forgiveness of sins that is in His name?

Christ came to save His people Israel. As the Bride of Christ which first mentions in her is Israel, Revelation 21:12.

 

[Noah Hirsch]

Christ came to save His people Israel. As the Bride of Christ which first mentions in her is Israel, Revelation 21:12.

Do you believe that Gentiles who believe are saved are saved by faith in the death of Christ? If not, then how do you believe they are saved? If so, are they not included as part of the Israel of God who will be saved and are of the bride of Christ?

 

[Yeshua1]

I would then, depart from New Covenant Theology on this point because I believe that the true Israel and the universal church signifies the same people, that the church existed under the old covenant, the covenant of Moses, and also before God gave that covenant to Israel on Mount Sinai. I believe that the church always was true spiritual Israel rather than that the church became Israel. If the church under the new covenant becomes Israel, then the church cannot be a continuation of the same people of God, of which Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, Hezekiah, David, Isaac, Jacob, Abel, Enoch, and others were all members, members of the same body and bride of Christ that we are.

I am a Reformed baptist, but tend to see the actual Church founded at Pentecost!

 

[Yeshua1]

We may disagree. I have the understanding, I maybe repeating this, the New Covenant was given to Israel and created the church. Saved Israel is part of the church, and the church is not israel. Now I agree the church began under the Old Covenant, but is the New Covenant creation.
John the Immersionist is an Old Covenant prophet and is a presenter of the New.

I see the actual NT Church started at Pentecost, but all of those saved by God in the OT were saved by Him as part of that Body, spiritual israel!

 

[Yeshua1]

maybe i mis understand what you are saying but i think you may understand what the term New Covenant Theology is in reference to.
New Covenant Theology is not in reference to the Theology of the New Covenant/Testament. Rather it is a New form of Covenant Theology. NCT is to differentiate itself from other and older forms of Covenant Theology that exist.
Thus, New Covenant Theology is to be read as New (Covenant Theology) rather than (New Covenant) Theology.

Yes, as still holding to a Covenant theology view, but not holding to all of it that classic form pf CT has!

 

[Yeshua1]

Im reading through some 1689 federalist books. Have you read Progressive Covenatalism?

Yes, as of right now leaning towards 1689 theology, as do see the Church founded at Pentecost, and do see still a Premil eschatology, and a hope for national Israel in future still!