Covenant Theology?

[PrettyboyAndy]

Is Covenant Theology correct? What's everyone's thoughts on this?

 

[SeventyOne]

I think it's a form of replacement theology that should be avoided because it requires the future promises to the Jews to be allegorized away, redefined, or just simply dropped and not spoken of.

 

[expos4ever]

Not sure what you mean by "Covenant Theology". Nevertheless, I think that Paul clearly believed in covenant theology in the sense that he saw the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus as essentially the fulfillment of the covenant God made with Israel. If one reads Romans carefully, letting Paul say what he wants to see rather than forcing him into our a priori expectations, covenant theology is there all over the place.

 

[expos4ever]

I think it's a form of replacement theology that should be avoided because it requires the future promises to the Jews to be allegorized away, redefined, or just simply dropped and not spoken of.

There are all sorts of reasons to conclude that Paul does not see things this way. Note this key passage from Romans 4:

For the promise to Abraham or to his [l]descendants that he would be heir of the world was not [m]through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are [n]of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.16 For this reason it is [o]by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to [r]those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, “A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU”)

Paul goes to great lengths to argue that God's covenant promises actually embrace all of humanity and not just Jews ("those of the Law").

And this is not the only example. Paul is very interested in explaining how Jesus constitutes an essential element of the covenant promises.

 

[SeventyOne]

There are all sorts of reasons to conclude that Paul does not see things this way. Note this key passage from Romans 4:

For the promise to Abraham or to his [l]descendants that he would be heir of the world was not [m]through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are [n]of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.16 For this reason it is [o]by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to [r]those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, “A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU”)

Paul goes to great lengths to argue that God's covenant promises actually embrace all of humanity and not just Jews ("those of the Law").

And this is not the only example. Paul is very interested in explaining how Jesus constitutes an essential element of the covenant promises.

I didn't say anything about the covenant.

 

[Greg J.]

There are all sorts of reasons to conclude that Paul does not see things this way. Note this key passage from Romans 4:

For the promise to Abraham or to his [l]descendants that he would be heir of the world was not [m]through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are [n]of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.16 For this reason it is [o]by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to [r]those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, “A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU”)

Paul goes to great lengths to argue that God's covenant promises actually embrace all of humanity and not just Jews ("those of the Law").

And this is not the only example. Paul is very interested in explaining how Jesus constitutes an essential element of the covenant promises.

I think I am agreeing with you when I say, Paul wrote "those of the Law," not something like "keepers of the Law." He is making a reference to the Jewish people, since he is writing to gentiles. This whole passage (and others) are about how those who inherit the promises are those that inherit them by faith, regardless of their blood heritage (which agrees with the plainly stated Romans 2:28-29).

 

[expos4ever]

I think I am agreeing with you when I say, Paul wrote "those of the Law," not something like "keepers of the Law." He is making a reference to the Jewish people, since he is writing to gentiles. This whole passage (and others) are about how those who inherit the promises are those that inherit them by faith, regardless of their blood heritage (which agrees with the plainly stated Romans 2:28-29).

Agree. However, my point is that Paul is going to great pains to refer to the covenant and is providing a fresh interpretation of it - one where the covenant promises are not for Jews only.

Paul is trying to pull off something difficult - take a covenant that, on surface appearances appears to be focused solely on the Jew, and "universalize" it. I think he succeeds - his position, while not the standard one of his day - is Biblically defensible and brilliantly argued (especially in Romans) in my opinion.