# Replacement theology = covenant theology?



## Richard King (Sep 2, 2005)

This will sound like political talk at first but it is a theology question.
Probably a simple one, but I am not trained enough to know the answer.

Tonight I was listening to an interview on a "˜Christian station "˜
http://www.ptcbglc.com/
(obsessed with teaching the Torah as much and as often as airtime allows) from this area and they had a guest who is a reporter stationed at the Whitehouse. 
His slant is clear at his website:
http://www.watch.org/

This Mr. Koenig said a lot of things that were fairly stunning in terms of how bluntly and unabashedly said them. Like saying that Arafat died of AIDS.

But more troubling was his assessment of the problem with the Bush administration. 
He said, "œthe problem is the majority of people advising or assisting the president is they are REPLACEMENT THEOLOGISTS." Then he went in to naming various Presbyterians such as Condoleeza Rice (and mentioning that her father and grandfather were Presbyterian ministers) This set the show´s host to saying"¦"say no more! We know just from that what we are dealing with. These are people who do not believe the covenant with Abraham was everlasting! "


My question is"¦is the term replacement theology the same thing as covenant theology?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Sep 2, 2005)

This was what I was taught by the Dispensational churches. In fact, it was why I refused to even hear about covenant theology when my husband and his friend started researching and discussing it. I had a talk with a pastor at a PCA church we attended for a time and he cleared things up for me. Albeit, I'll let the other more knowledgable members of the board explain this.


----------



## JKLeoPCA (Sep 2, 2005)

[quote
My question is"¦is the term replacement theology the same thing as covenant theology? [/quote]


It seems to me that Dispensationalists nickname us as "replacement theologians" because of a misunderstanding of our Covenant Theology. They do not typically believe that the church is in the OT, only the Jewish people nationally. They have a "mountain peak" gap theology where the church is a parenthesis in-between God's dealing with the Jews. So in Covenant Theology, where we believe the church has been God's focus throughout the ages, they hear us say that the church (NT) has eternally "replaced" the Jews, as being the people of God. 

I sure that muddied up the water a bit.



[Edited on 9-2-2005 by JKLeoPCA]


----------



## crhoades (Sep 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by JKLeoPCA_
> [quote
> My question is"¦is the term replacement theology the same thing as covenant theology?




It seems to me that Dispensationalists nickname us as "replacement theologians" because of a misunderstanding of our Covenant Theology. They do not typically believe that the church is in the OT, only the Jewish people nationally. They have a "mountain peak" gap theology where the church is a parenthesis in-between God's dealing with the Jews. So in Covenant Theology, where we believe the church has been God's focus throughout the ages, they hear us say that the church (NT) has eternally "replaced" the Jews, as being the people of God. 

I sure that muddied up the water a bit.



[Edited on 9-2-2005 by JKLeoPCA] [/quote]
I vote your avatar as the coolest one currently on the board!


----------



## turmeric (Sep 2, 2005)

http://www.chaim.org/xpansion.htm


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 2, 2005)

_replacement theology_ is pejorative-- whatever it personifies...


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Sep 2, 2005)

Koenig is big with the Dispensationalists, and well loved by raptureready for his political commentaries.

Ironically this guy said that the hurricane happened because the homosexuals were about to descend upon New Orleans for their weekend of decadence.

[Edited on 9-2-2005 by Slippery]


----------



## tcalbrecht (Sep 2, 2005)

"Replacement theology" is anything that is not hard core dispensationalism. It is not limited to covenant theology, although covenant theologians are the most common opponents of the Dispensationalists.

I found this web site interesting. It appears like one of the many "messianic jewish" sites, expressing a desire to return to the "hebrew roots" of Christianity, with one twist. On their bookstore site they list some titles by Dell Sanchez, one titled _Sephardic Destiny A Latino Quest_. The bottom line here is the view that diaspora Jews from the Babylonian captivity ended up in Spain, and that the reference to "Sepharad" in Obadiah 20 is a reference to these Jews. (The meaning of "Sepharad" is unknown. The Spanish connection is based on a "sounds like" view.) The outworking of this theology is that of Spanish Christians seeking their "Sephardic roots" with the idea that one day these Sephardic Jews will inhabit a portion of the promised land. Kinda a variation on British-Israelism.


----------



## Robin (Sep 3, 2005)

Oy, Tom!



Robin


----------



## rgrove (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Richard King_
> He said, "œthe problem is the majority of people advising or assisting the president is they are REPLACEMENT THEOLOGISTS." Then he went in to naming various Presbyterians such as Condoleeza Rice (and mentioning that her father and grandfather were Presbyterian ministers) This set the show´s host to saying"¦"say no more! We know just from that what we are dealing with. These are people who do not believe the covenant with Abraham was everlasting! "
> 
> My question is"¦is the term replacement theology the same thing as covenant theology?


Good grief... As people have noted, this is a derogatory term intended to immediately put down anyone who's not dispensational. The next item on the list is "spiritualizer" and then comes "liberal". As with a lot of derogatory labels, it mostly plasters their ignorance on a bright, neon sign for all to see than anything else. 

I think Rice's father is PCUSA so there's no telling what he believes... And it's a far stretch to say that his eschatology, whatever it may be, is a primary influence on Rice and then the President. I think Billy Graham has had more influence on him than Rice would in this respect and I believe he's always been a Dispensational. Graham's awful soteriology is certainly reflected in the President, so why not his eschatology, too?


----------



## RamistThomist (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by rgrove_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Richard King_
> ...



Right, I don't see Condy encouraging Bush to act in terms of the Second Adam, Olive Tree, and their Geographic implications.


----------



## Herald (Sep 7, 2005)

*Need an Excedrin*

Sheesh!  I get the feeling I am eschatologically in the dark. This is why I am a "Baptist in Crisis." Many of my friends (and church family) are entrenched in dispensationalism. Hey...my pastor is a dispensationalist (but a Calvinist soteriologically). Me? I am caught in that great gulf inbetween. 

Help!

[Edited on 9-7-2005 by BaptistInCrisis]


----------



## Richard King (Sep 7, 2005)

See this is what I don't get. Didn't dispensationalism come about within the last two centuries? If so, would that be the replacement theology? Since they are replacing what was known before.
So many words to get tangled up in.


----------



## Herald (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Richard King_
> See this is what I don't get. Didn't dispensationalism come about within the last two centuries? If so, would that be the replacement theology? Since they are replacing what was known before.
> So many words to get tangled up in.



Richard - the "replacement" in replacement theology has nothing to do with one theology being usurped by another. It has to do with the church replacing Israel. But from a practical perspective, you're right.


----------



## RamistThomist (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BaptistInCrisis_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Richard King_
> ...



Technically speaking I, for one, don't necessarily see the Church "replacing' Israel, since I veiw Adam, Aaron, Abraham, and others as in "the church." A better way of saying it--which in essence is the same thing--is seeing the people of God being redefined around the Church as a non-nationalistic Israel.


----------



## Richard King (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BaptistInCrisis_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Richard King_
> ...




Thanks. Good point. I forget that attitude that Israel was replaced because I always think in terms of being grafted in with Israel while other branches are pruned off for "not getting it".


----------



## turmeric (Sep 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Richard King_
> See this is what I don't get. Didn't dispensationalism come about within the last two centuries? If so, would that be the replacement theology? Since they are replacing what was known before.
> So many words to get tangled up in.


----------



## bigheavyq (Sep 23, 2005)

according to Romans 11, the apostate branches were broken off one tree and gentiles were grafted in. their is one tree - the church, the people of God. according to dispensationalism their would have to be two trees one for the church and one for national israel. this is the problem if romans 11 is true then it is replacement theology. of course, growing up in Dispensational arminian churches, I never heard one sermon from Rom 9-11.


----------



## Casey (Nov 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by James McGrail_
> How old is Covenant Theology? It seems to me to have been around since New Testament times. Is that a correct conclusion?


There are seeds of Covenant Theology through the ages, though the most developed form didn't come until the 1500's, as far as I'm aware.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 21, 2005)

If I am not mistaken replacement theology is a newer term that signifies Presbyterian Covenant Theology. 

They replace baptism for circumcision as one example. Some Reformed Baptists who hold to Covenant Theology do not believe baptism replaces circumcision. I think I recently picked up on this reading Nehemiah Coxe or Richard Barcellos. 

I may be wrong here but that is a possibility. As far as I see it, it seems that dispensationalism is much more of a replacement theology than either view. It replaces Covenants with diverse dispensations. Unbiblical thought as far as I see it. I believe the Covenant of Works, Covenant of Redemption, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New Covenant are a far better signature of what God has and is doing.

[Edited on 11-21-2005 by puritancovenanter]


----------

