Bible Science Forum

, , ,

Covenant Theology Has Historically Taught That There is Only One People of God United in Christ

The debate around Covenant Theology, replacement theology, and dispensationalism has intensified online. Covenant Theology posits one unified people of God through Christ, unlike dispensationalism, which promotes two distinct groups. The true church is seen as the fulfillment of God’s promises, integrating both Jews and Gentiles into one faith community under Christ.

John Gideon Hartnett
6–9 minutes
, , , , , , , ,

The issues around of Covenant Theology, replacement theology and dispensationalism are now discussed a lot on social media. I have said before that what is normally framed as replacement theology is not the same as Covenant Theology or what I have called Fulfillment Theology.

If you were to add that God finished His work on the cross, terminating and fulfilling all of the promises to Israel in Jesus Christ, then you could say He replaced the nation state of Israel (not the current one but the Old Testament one) with His new nation under a new covenant. That new nation are all those whether they be Jew or non-Jew who put their faith alone in Jesus Christ.

I found this post on X to be a clear explanation of the issues. (Comments and bold emphases are mine)

I see many comments from dispensationalists accusing Covenant Theology of teaching replacement theology. That accusation is repeated so often that many people assume it must be true. The reality is the opposite. The idea that God deals with two separate peoples in two separate plans is the work of dispensationalism itself, not Covenant Theology.

Covenant Theology has historically taught that there is one people of God united in Christ. The promises made to Abraham find their fulfilment in Christ and therefore in all who belong to Him. Scripture is clear on this point. “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise” Galatians 3:29. The church is not a replacement for Israel. It is the continuation and fulfilment of the covenant people gathered through the Messiah. Paul explains this using the image of an olive tree where Gentile believers are grafted in among the natural branches. “If some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree” Romans 11:17. There is one tree, not two separate peoples of God.

[JGH: Both Jewish believers who had been broken off and Gentile believers are grafted onto the stock or root of the olive tree. But the root is not the Israelite nation as some suppose but our Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 11:17. In the heresies of Satan it is always Jesus Christ who is replaced by the nation of Israel.]

The charge of replacement theology is actually a product of a much later system. In the sixteenth century during the Reformation, Jesuit scholars such as Francisco Ribera in 1585 developed a futurist interpretation of prophecy in response to Protestant reformers who identified the papal system as the Antichrist. Ribera pushed most prophetic fulfilment into a distant future and separated Israel and the church in the prophetic timeline. Later another Jesuit writer, Manuel Lacunza in the late eighteenth century, expanded these ideas.

[JGH: Before Lacunza, but after Ribera, Jesuit scholar Cardinal Robert Bellarmine also promoted the same futurist eschatology.]

In the nineteenth century John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren adopted and systematized these concepts into what became dispensationalism. Darby taught that God has two distinct peoples with two different destinies. That framework was later popularized through the Scofield Reference Bible published in 1909. From there it spread widely through Bible conferences and evangelical institutions.

[JGH: Darby added a preTribulation secret rapture, before the last 7-year “week” of Daniel started. So he saw the “church” secretly taken out of the world before the Jews were mass slaughtered by the AntiChrist. That is, the “church” doesn’t suffer while Israel does. And that has to occur after the 3rd Temple is built which brings on the AntiChrist and finally the Second Coming of Christ.]

Ironically the system that divides Israel and the church into separate programs is the one that creates the very tension it then accuses others of holding. The New Testament consistently points to fulfilment in Christ rather than separation. Paul writes that Christ “has made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall” Ephesians 2:14. Gentiles who were once strangers are now “fellow citizens with the saints and are of God’s household” Ephesians 2:19.

The gospel does not create two peoples of God. It gathers one people from every nation through the Messiah. That is the consistent witness of the New Testament and the historic teaching of the church long before modern dispensational systems appeared.

The Western evangelical churches and denominations have largely been deceived into a false theology (dispensationalism). Even some teach that the Jews do not need Christ because they are under the Old Covenant with annual animal sacrifices, which the religious Jews don’t do at the moment, so they need to build the 3rd Temple to restart them. John Hagee, shown above, is one of those who teaches that. The problem with that is, the Old Covenant could not and cannot save.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Hebrews 10:4 AKJV

It was for that reason that Christ had to be born fully human, and to die on the cross as a substitute for the sins of the whole world, to pay the debt we owe the Father.

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Romans 3:23-24 AKJV

The Father prepared Him a body, born into human flesh but sinless, that He might make the once-for-all sacrifice on the cross for all those who put their trust in Him.

5 Why when he comes into the world, he said, Sacrifice and offering you would not, but a body have you prepared me:

Hebrews 10:5 AKJV

The result of the last hundreds years of teaching the false dispensational doctrine in the evangelical churches may be the war we are now experiencing with Israel and the USA on one side and Iran with Hezbollah on the other side supported by Russia and China. And that could go global.

This is ironic because it could have the outcome that the dispensationalist Christian Zionists are hoping for, the destruction of Israel and the rise of an authoritarian antichrist power. But along with that may be the planned destruction of the US dollar and the introduction of digital currency to control and surveil the masses. I don’t think it will be long now.

Related Reading

The Good News – the Gospel

Free Subscribers

Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Free Subscriber and be notified by email. Just put your email address in the box at the bottom of your screen.

You’ll get an email each time we publish a new article. It is quick and easy to do and totally free. You only need do it once.

Premium Subscribers

Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Premium Subscribers at $5 USD/month or $30 USD/year (you choose). Cancel anytime.

Paid Premium Subscribers will get exclusive access to certain content I publish. That will only cost you a cup of coffee per month.

Also you’ll be able to download, for free, a PDF of my book Apocalypse Now and also a PDF of my book The Physics of Creation The Creator’s Ultimate Design for Earth.

You can download them from the link below.

click for Premium Subscription

This is how you can support my work. I have been publishing this website for 10 years now and up to 2024 I never asked for any support.

Press the button “Premium” on the front page to find a list of Premium content. Thanks so much to all supporters.

At a minimum, please join as a Free Subscriber. It’ll cost you nothing. It may also help me beat the shadow banning of some posts.

Comments Welcome Below

7 responses to “Covenant Theology Has Historically Taught That There is Only One People of God United in Christ”

  1. mattmckone56 Avatar
    mattmckone56

    John,10; 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      Nice one.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  2. mortallypsychic232e290dee Avatar
    mortallypsychic232e290dee

    Absolutely agree with you in the conclusion of this post. If not this moment in time but shortly beyond is the goal of financial restructuring with the destruction of the Whore and, indulge me, the end of Zionism. The beast can broach no other worship.

    Like

    Reply
  3. vupinto Avatar
    vupinto

    You, having had the basis of Covenant Theology, I strongly recommend to move to New Covenant Theology. Though they likely never intended it, a good statement of faith would be the First London Baptist Confession of 1644, two years before WCF.

    A very good writer is John Reisinger and his ‘Continuity and Discontinuity, ‘Tablets of Stone’, Abraham’s Four Seeds, ‘But I say unto you’. And David H. J. Gay’s magnum opus ‘Christ is All’. Best to get the hardcopy of this. Then, you can follow the text with his audio reading of the work in the playlist on YT. And follow literally any of his works. They are also available on Kindle from Amazon. Each is a masterpiece. If you want, I can recommend his other top nine.

    This said, I want to point an important caveat with the phrase ‘people of God’. This is what I had posted at a FB group. I posted my comment in response to an assertion the author had concerning the ‘woman’ in Rev 12. For our purposes, here, we need not get into what that discussion was. So I’d ask to only focus the expression ‘people of God’ and its unfortunate conflation. Here it is:

    ——-
    This has a lot to do with the unfortunate biasing of the CT belief that the “Church” existed in the OT too. I realize that there is no doubt that the woman represents the elect in the NT, but she does NOT represent the elect in the OT. This is eisegeting into the OT text.

    As we know, we cannot make a doctrine out of single verses, neither is it safe or prudent to draw inferences from a single verse IF there are other verses that shed light on it.

    The symbol of the Rev 12 woman actually represents two sets of people. Yes, two! As you rightly point out, she does represent the elect in the NT. In other words, in the NT she represents the people of God, and in the NT, the people of God are exclusively the elect, the Church. Recall, there is no “Church” in the OT, notwithstanding what CT and CT-thumpers (such as I once was) might have us believe.

    However, in the OT, the people of God are ALL the Jews, the non-elect AND the elect! God had chosen a people out of the world, out of all nations, for himself, aka people of God!! So even though Dothan, Jezebel, Ahab et al are NOT among the redeemed, the elect, they ARE, nevertheless, the people of God, but in the OT!

    And at the time of Jesus conception and birth there was NO NT. Not until Jesus’ death burial and resurrection to ratify the promised everlasting New Covenant. Ergo, the Church could never be his “Mother”, for the simple reason that “she” hadn’t come into being yet!
    ——-

    All this said, there are other expressions such as the Bride, the sheep, the elect, the redeemed, the Church, the church, the body of Christ, and so on, which need to be explained in context, and are separate discussions.

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      I agree Vincent. Whether you call that theology new or old CT it is what I understand the plan of God has always been. I have read a little of John Reisinger before but looks like I need to read more. Thanks.

      Like

      Reply
      1. vupinto Avatar
        vupinto

        >Whether you call that theology new or old CT< Actually Jeremiah does, and his words fascinatingly declare the stark difference: Jer 31:31-34.And when he arrives on the scene, Jesus at the last supper, ratifies in his own blood that New Covenant, what his prophet Jeremiah had declared.

        Like

      2. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
        John Gideon Hartnett

        I agree with your point. Of course I see the difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

Trending