Keep sharing good news without ads.
This is part one of our 8-part course for Sovereign Grace Academy.
Well, good evening everybody. It is good to be back from our vacation. I'm very grateful for the time that Jennifer and I had to be away, but we're also very thankful to be back so it's good to see everybody and We are looking forward to beginning our new Sovereign Grace Academy term tonight.
Now for those of you who don't know what that is Sovereign Grace Academy is our certificate program here at the church where we provide it's a Ministerial training course and we we have a basic two-year course that people can take which includes Old Testament survey New Testament survey hermeneutics, church history Apologetics things like that and those classes are all available online.
We've taught those over the years. I've actually taught each of those classes three times each so it took us a few years to get through those. Miss Jackie took them Several times. Miss Daisy's taken them several times.
Miss Kitty's taken them several times a few of the others have. But about a year and a half ago two years ago. We started adding in 201 classes and 301 classes. So what that means is all of our first year first two-year courses are all 100 classes.
Just like when you go to college you have those basic classes that everybody has to take. That's the 100 classes and then we have the 200 class courses and the 300 class courses. Well tonight is a 300 class course.
That means it's this is a little bit of a higher level than some of our basic stuff. But do not let that. Cause you to be afraid if you've never been to the Academy before if you've never been a part of this before don't let that Make you feel like you are somehow inadequate.
We try to make everything accessible to everyone. We just want to continue to increase the depth and level of what we're doing. And that's what the goals of these classes are and tonight we are going to be beginning the course Entitled Israel the church and the promises of God.
But before we begin this course We want to begin with prayer. Now because of time we won't have time to take prayer requests before prayer tonight. But I do want to let you know that if you have a prayer request you would like for us to pray for at the End of the class after we've concluded and shut off the live stream I'll have an opportunity for you to share those with me.
And if you want something put in the bulletin That would be the time to do it as well because we do put prayer requests in the bulletin for Sunday morning. So, please just write it down and hand it to me or let me know after class and we'll make sure that your prayer requests Are known by the church.
Everybody got it. Alright, let's let's begin with prayer. Father we thank you for the opportunity to be here again tonight and to begin this course with Sovereign Grace Academy. We're so grateful that you have raised up this Small teaching arm of the church that has given us an opportunity not only to reach the people that are here But the people that also come and take courses from us online.
We pray a blessing over those who are taking the course here and those who are taking the course online. And we pray that this would be an encouragement to them and help them to better understand how the whole story of the Bible fits together.
And Lord I do pray That throughout the teaching of this course that you would bless brother Mike and I that you would keep us from error in our teaching. That you would keep us tied to the post of truth, which is your word and Lord Do not let us stray.
I do also pray Lord for those areas where there are contention in regard to theology where there are different positions and different people that hold different positions Lord that we would try to be gracious and be able to Recognize that different people have different views and and that we can Remain Christians and in brother brotherly fellowship even where we disagree and Lord We pray all of this in Jesus name and for his sake.
Amen. Good evening, brother Bill and Bill. We've got two handouts for you. They're just excellent right there. Thank you. Yes, sir and so As I mentioned before the prayer the title of this course is Israel the church and The promises of God and this class will address One primary question over the next eight weeks.
We're going to deal with one primary question. That is what is the relationship? Between Old Testament Israel Jesus Christ and The New Testament Church, and how are the promises made to Israel fulfilled?
So that's the question that this course is going to seek to answer and You all have a copy of the syllabus I gave it to you when you came in tonight, and I just want to make sure that you understand What is expected especially for those of you who are wanting to earn a certificate now if you are here as a guest like we?
Have a young man who's a guest with us tonight, or if you're here only to audit the course You're not looking to earn a certificate then. Don't worry about when I talk about the final exam, but everything else.
I would hope that you would do because the reading of the textbook and the keeping of the notebook are Essential to really getting the full Experience of the class. If all you do is come to class and listen you're going to learn.
But if you read the textbook and do the notebook along with the class you will get a better experience. And if you go forward and actually write the report when you're done You'll get the full experience of the class and you'll earn a certificate which again is you know?
We're not an accredited seminary or anything like that we don't claim to be we call ourselves a seminary for everybody in the sense of we are a We are an opportunity for people to learn more deeply and dig a little bit more deeply and these certificates I have I do know people churches that their elders take classes with us.
And they use these as as part of what helps them to prepare for teaching and things in their churches. So so we sort of see ourselves as like a lay opportunity for people or an opportunity for lay leaders To to get some of the instruction that they may not get in other courses such as church history and things like that.
So tonight's course overview is this this course examines the major promises God made throughout the Old Testament and Demonstrates how they find their ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ and the establishment of the new covenant.
Special attention will be given to biblical themes of covenant kingdom temple land priesthood. The people of God and the people of God tracing their development through promise from promise to fulfillment.
The course will also introduce and critically evaluate several major theological frameworks for understanding redemptive history including dispensationalism reformed covenant theology supersessionism and new covenant fulfillment.
Theology students will be encouraged to examine these systems in light of Scripture and Develop a cohesive or coherent rather biblical theology centered on Christ. Now you are all asked to get the textbook.
The textbook is entitled all the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ the Christo centric Heart of Scripture. This textbook is written by Chris Brown and it was written the forward was it by me? So so I did have the opportunity to read this book before it came out.
I had the opportunity to critique and talk to Chris about it and I endorsed what was in the book and Believe that what he is saying is accurate. So this is the textbook that you're going to get. They are five dollars and ninety cent on Amazon if you get the printed copy.
So they're not terribly expensive. You can get a digital copy for free if you have Kindle unlimited so you can just go and look at the digital copy. I have already ordered several copies to have here.
I thought I'd have them today, but I don't. I'll have them next week. I'll have them by Sunday if any of you don't have Amazon or aren't able to order online I'll have some copies you can order and. And I'll have those available by Sunday if you want to wait and just pick one up for me from me.
But here's the thing about the textbook there are two versions of this book. There's the all the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ. Then there's the all the promises student edition. You might think you need the student edition because your students but you don't.
You need the regular edition. The student edition is a little bit different and so that we're all looking at the same thing. Please get a copy of the regular edition of the book. If you have not registered for this class and you are wanting to get a certificate, please go to sovereign grace Academy org and do that.
We did have a problem with the security of our website. Our website went down for a few days. Because of some problems that were going on it is back up now. So if you were unable to register over the last few days you can go in now and register for the class if you have.
Any issues, please let me know. Talks here about academic character reading requirements. Your reading requirements are stated in the syllabus. Notebook assignments are stated in the syllabus. Or rather your notebook assignment is that you were to keep a notes.
You're to keep notes for each class and Show your notebook at the end of the course. That's part of this. If you're doing this class online. You have to send in a copy of a page of your notes and we do that on the honor system.
I can't take a picture of every note from your notebook. But take a picture of a random page show me that you did the work and and you'll get credit for it. So there are eight courses brother Mike is teaching half of them and I am teaching half of them tonight.
I'm going to be teaching on the introduction, which is understanding theological frameworks next week. Brother Mike's going to be teaching the Old Testament scriptures prophetic foundations pointing to Christ in the week after that.
He's going to be teaching the New Testament scriptures explicit fulfillment of Old Testament promises. Then I'll be back to teach the extension of Israel's promises to all nations through Christ and then September 9th Jesus the true Israel that will be Very important class and a very important part of the book.
So, please make sure to read that in preparation for that class. It shows you the corresponding chapters in the book in the syllabus. So you can read ahead if you'd like so that you know what we're going to be talking about.
Brother Mike's going to do Gentile inclusion and acts in the epistles as well as Christ in Ezekiel the true and Ultimate temple and then I'm going to come in at the very end and finish it out with why does all this matters?
What does it mean to live the Christ centered life? Does anybody have a question about the syllabus or how the? Academy classes work. Awesome. Good means I either explained it well or I so confused you that now you have no idea even what to ask either way.
We're moving on. Okay, the primary text for this class actually comes from 2nd Corinthians chapter 1 and verse 20 if you have your Bibles and would like to open them there you're welcome to and this passage is actually going to sort of set the Set the stage for all that we're going to be talking about over the next eight weeks.
If any of you remember, I actually preached a series of messages through 2nd Corinthians about I guess it was a couple of years ago. Now took me I think 14 15 months to get through 2nd Corinthians, but I did a message on this particular passage so if you want to go back and look up what I taught on this passage and get a little bit more of the Understanding of the context and how it relates to the rest of the book of 2nd Corinthians.
You can do that on certain audio. You can find all of those messages by going to our sermon audio page, but second Corinthians chapter 2 or chapter 1 verse 20 says. For all the promises of God find their yes in him.
That is why it is through him that being Jesus that we utter our amen to God for his glory. The New Living Translation, which is a They call it a dynamic equivalent, but it's more of a paraphrastic Translation of the New Testament.
It actually says for all the all of God's promises have been fulfilled in Christ with a resounding. Yes, and Even though that's a paraphrase. I do think that that is accurately Attempting to get across what Paul is saying here that there were Israel.
There were promises that God made to his people specifically to Israel and all of those promises Ultimately find their fulfillment. They ultimately get their yes or amen. They ultimately get their end or tell us what we call the purpose of them is ultimately fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ.
And so that is the heart of what we are learning in this class a major thesis of this class is that all of God's Promises to Israel have their ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
Graham Goldsworthy who is a Bible scholar and teacher said this he says Christ is the end to which the Old Testament points the goal. Toward which it moves the single central message of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.
It's God's unfolding plan of salvation through Jesus Christ. Paul Barnett Echoes this when he says since Christ is the fulfillment of all of God's numerous promises. It follows that the Old Testament where the promises are made really makes sense.
Only when it is read with Christ in mind. The Old Testament finds its meaning its fulfillment its understanding full understanding. Through Jesus Christ Christ is the divine confirmation of every old covenant promise.
God's faithfulness is measured not by ethnic continuity, but by Christological fulfillment. The promises of God ultimately reach their intended fulfillment in Jesus Christ. But almost every theological system would agree with that.
I could say that I could say that in a dispensational church I could say that in a reformed Baptist Church and I could say that in a Presbyterian Church and all of them would say Amen if all I said was the promises of God ultimately Reach their intended fulfillment through Jesus Christ.
Everybody would say amen, but I mean even John MacArthur one of the most profound Dispensationalist teachers of the last hundred years. He would say amen brother Fossey. He's with the Lord now, but he would if he were here.
I think he would say amen. The disagreement then is Not whether or not the promises of God are finding their fulfillment in Christ, but the disagreement is on how They find their fulfillment in Christ.
And what does it mean that they find their fulfillment in Christ? That's where the differences lie. So the point that I'm making in this is is is the heart of this class is not controversial. It's the particulars that are controversial the the ultimate point of the class that all the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ.
That's not the part that we are really Disagreeing with other Christians on it's one of the particulars of how that works out. What does that look like? How does that actually come to pass? And so? Special questions come up out of that special Questions specific questions related to this are questions like this.
Well What does that mean for national Israel? That's probably the biggest first question that people ask. Well, if all the promises are fulfilled in Christ, we agree. But what does that mean for national Israel?
Was Israel itself The ultimate object of God's promise or or was Israel a type that pointed beyond itself? Does the church replace Israel? That's a big question something called replacement. Theology is a big hot-button topic among people that they want to debate and argue about so that comes up.
Does the church continue to be Israel is the church spiritual Israel? That's another big question, right? These are all the particulars. These are the things we're going to address. These are the things we have to talk about.
Does Christ in some way fulfill Israel. Is Christ the true Israel that's another debated topic that we're going to address. Does ethnic national Israel retain promises that still must be fulfilled in the future?
To fulfill the promises of God. That's a huge question. All of these are part of what we want to address and what we're going to address in this class now I want to Mention one other thing because we're going to look at four theological systems tonight, but before we do that I want to I want to talk about Two words that I think you need to be familiar with and the words are the words Christocentric.
Okay, and the word Christo tellic Christocentric and Christo tellic you'll notice in the book That it says all the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ and then the subtitle is the Christo centric heart of Scripture, so What is Christo centric mean?
Christocentric means that Christ is Actually at the center of the entire Bible not that if you open your Bible to the center You're going to find the word Christ. That's not what that means, but ultimately everything in the Bible is about Jesus this sees Christ as the center of the biblical story the persons the promises the covenants the Institutions and the events of Scripture ultimately find their fullest meaning and fulfillment in him.
That's what Christo centric theology is. Christo tellic takes a slightly different approach the word tell us means purpose. Goal. Or in The word tell us means purpose goal or in so what do you think Christo tellic would mean in that regard?
Yeah, he's the purpose. He's the purpose for which all of this and and you would say well that sounds like Christo centric and they really do have Some overlap, but here is where the differences are important.
In a Christo tellic understanding of Scripture. There is a greater emphasis on understanding Old Testament texts within their original historical context before Tracing how they culminate in Christ and and most of us would say that sounds good.
It does that sounds really good a Christo tellic approach is often more concerned with preserving the historical meaning of an Old Testament text in its original Context before asking how that text finds its tell us in Christ and people would say again that sounds great, right?
We want to know what the original author intended. But Here's where the issue rises at times with the Christo tellic approach. There are times where the Christo tellic approach can lead to separating the original Old Testament Meaning too sharply from its full New Testament fulfillment.
And here's an example just a real-life example of something that happened to me. We I have a friend. He's a missionary and he and I were talking about Our differences in how we understand Old Testament New Testament the continuity of the two and and specifically Old Testament fulfillment.
And he said yeah, Isaiah 53 is not written about Jesus. You remember we had this conversation Mike. You remember you know exactly what I'm talking about. And I said I said I said Isaiah 53 Was not he says no.
He said because the original audience would not have understood that therefore that's not what it meant. I Said okay. All right. Well, let's let's break that down. You're saying that's not what it meant or that's not what it means.
You say what I just did there thinking wise because if if the original audience Did not fully understand that it has its fulfillment in Christ. Does that mean that's not what it meant? No. Because it the the meaning of it was known by the Spirit when it was inspired and It was about Christ when it was inspired.
Even if that was not fully known by the original audience. Therefore that's a more Christocentric approach. I'm saying it was always about Jesus. It didn't just become about Jesus when Jesus came. No, it was always about Christ ultimately and Darin is where there is some difficulty.
But as I want to say and I do want to make this clear there are dangers in both approaches a Christocentric approach can at times be dangerous if you have people who make Artificial connections from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
You say what do you mean an artificial connection? Well, for instance, you guys remember the story of the Exodus when the Israelites were told to take the blood of the Lamb and to paint it on the doorpost in the lintel of their home and they were to do so for the purpose of Identifying themselves as the people of God so that God when he passed through Egypt he would not Strike down the firstborn in that home.
We all know that all of us would agree that that is a picture of the blood of Christ, which is That that that is placed upon us and and protects us from the wrath of God, right? We would we would understand that there's a fulfillment in that.
But I remember years ago I heard somebody preaching this and he was taking a sort of a Christocentric approach finding Christ and everything and he said yes. And when they painted the doorpost in the lintel they painted crosses.
And I said, well, let's say Slow down One the doorpost in the lintel like this if they paint here and here I mean, I guess he could have been I mean Mike's a painter. He could have went a little a little saucy with his paint up and a little saucy with his paint to the side.
He could have made the image of a cross but when you start doing that type of Reading now you are making artificial connections where they're not necessarily there. Does that blood point to Christ? Yes, was it painted in the shape of a cross?
Yeah, that's a little harder to make that argument. There's also the argument that if you looked from the sky at the people of God when they were in their places that the the people of God of Israel made the shape of a cross and This is in the book of Numbers.
I took a book of Numbers class when I was in seminary we Executed the entire book went through the whole thing. It was really neat class, but I remember one of the guys in class said yeah. Well, if you count the number of people here, it's more this way than it is this way.
If you count the number here, it's this and it makes a cross. So if you were looking at it from the heavens, you would look down and see a cross and I said that's interesting. Don't know if it's right, but it sure sounds interesting and That's the type of artificial connections that sometimes are Are labeled under Christa centricity, so we do have to be careful not to make those artificial distinctions.
We want to make the connection or artificial connection. We want to make the connections that the Bible makes, right? We want to make the Bible tells us Jesus is our Passover lamb, right? It clearly tells us Jesus is our Passover lamb.
I don't have to make an artificial connection. It's made for me. I'm also told in Luke 24 that all of the Old Testament Ultimately points to Jesus because when Jesus was talking to the two on the road to Emmaus what he said Starting with Moses and all the prophets.
He explained to them the scriptures how they pointed to him. So I know that Jesus is in the Old Testament, I know it ultimately points to him but the question of whether or not We should find Christ there.
We don't have to necessarily go making up this. Connections the connections are there. They're organic. They're in the text. We don't have to we don't have to artificially create them. So I would say these two approaches are not necessarily opposed to one another but they are distinct.
The major question is not whether the Old Testament points to or is and is fulfilled in Christ. But how it is fulfilled and how that fulfillment relates to the original meaning purpose and the recipients that receive the text.
So I just wanted you when you saw that Word on the front of the book Christ is in your card of scripture that saying Christ is in the Old Testament. Now the whole Bible points to Jesus and if somebody says well, we're not Christa centric.
We're Christ to tell it. What that means is they try to find in the Old Testament the original audiences Understanding before finding the fulfillment and there's nothing wrong with that there's nothing wrong with that, but there is a distinction in the hermeneutic at least from sort of a more basic perspective.
Anybody got a question about that before we move on? Okay. Now we're going to move to our four Theological positions that we are going to address tonight. These are four frameworks that seek to answer the question of how the promises of God are fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ and the four that we are going to examine are.
And I'm going to write them in four different places because I'm going to make notes under each one. The first one is Dispensationalism. The second one is Is called Supercessionism. Third one is called reformed covenant Theology now you would you would expect that that one would be us.
Because you hear us all the time Use terms reformed you hear us talk about being a reformed Baptist Church. Like you would expect this would be us. We would fall under the last category more closely. But I'm going to show how there's actually some things in each of these that we would probably say well.
They're not a hundred percent wrong, but this is where we would make the distinctions the last one we would call new covenant fulfillment theology now of all the positions up here this one does not have a.
This does not have a group with which we can connect it with as far as Saying here's the historical group, or here's the historical because dispensationalist as we mentioned earlier. There's John MacArthur, there's Dallas Theological Seminary, which some people call dispensational theological seminary because it's it is very richly deeply dispensational.
Supercessionism actually we're going to talk about some more of what that would that would fall into even like Roman Catholicism would be dispensationalist organization or at least Ostensibly would fall under some of their theology.
Reformed covenant theology. Who's that? That's our Presbyterian friends right and even our reformed Baptist friends would actually fall in a subcategory. That's called 1689 federalism, so there's a there's a whole subcategory of that each one of these has subcategories.
New covenant fulfillment theology the closest thing that we could ascribe to this. That's been more systematized would be something called new covenant theology NCT. That was popularized by men like John Rissinger Blake White Back in the day.
It was guys like Tom Schreiner, but he's not really a new covenant guy anymore. But at one time I would say he was he would more have Use that term the modern more more modern expression. This is called progressive Progressive Covenantalism.
Progressive covenantalism that is what is primarily taught at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. That's the teachings of Stephen Wellum and Peter Gentry. It's in their giant book called Kingdom through Covenant.
They have a smaller book which I recommend people read because it's a little bit more accessible. It's called God's Kingdom through God's Covenant it's the abridged version of the of the massive one and If you want to learn more if you if you take this class enjoy this class and want to dive deeper I would say first book I would recommend would be God's Kingdom through God's Covenant and then if you're ready to take on the the big one go to Kingdom through Covenant and.
And that would that would express but that these all would be saying very similar things in regard to what we're going to be talking about tonight, and if I seem like I'm going fast I am because I'm about to explain for theological frameworks in 35 minutes, so Dispensationalism Says that Israel and the church are distinct.
Israel and the church are distinct must remain distinct. That's the major Tenet I don't care what type of dispensationalist you are and there are three at least three different types. There's There's classic dispensationalism.
There was a more revised version of dispensationalism, and then there's progressive dispensationalism. Which is the more modern version, but all of them the one thing that holds them all together well?
There's they're all pre-millennial but they are also all Holding a strong distinction between Israel and the church that God has promises to the ethnic national people of Israel. That still are yet to be fulfilled.
That is something that holds through all dispensational views whether it's classic revised or Progressive so no matter what Israel and the church are distinct that is their view. Supersessionism is That Israel was God's chosen people, but the church replaced Israel the church Replaced Israel.
Israel was God's covenant people. They cease to be God's covenant people and the church is now God's covenant people. This is as close as you're going to get to what some would call Replacement theology we're going to talk about the how that distinction is made and how the arguments are made for that and there.
And as I said none of these groups Have everything wrong. There are things that we're going to see that is interesting that there are parables that sound very supersessionistic. Sounds like Mary Poppins supersessionist.
But There are parables that sound like God takes it away from one group and gives it to another right that that's the very language of Scripture so we understand how they get there right we got to be clear that that We wouldn't none of these are just totally off the board as far as like I think some I think they lead to some wrong Conclusions, but we understand how to get there the third one Reformed covenant theology this one is this one is a little harder, but you have to understand.
Covenant theology believes that there is one covenant of grace that began with Adam in the garden and Continues to the end of the age and it goes through different administrations. Right, but it's all the same covenant of grace that is classic covenant theology.
One covenant of grace different administrations. So they would say that Old Testament Israel is a different administration of the same covenant as the church. So it's one covenant two administrations.
Okay, so so Here's here's here's where the simple part in this Israel Equals the church because it's all the church. It's all the covenant of grace. It's all one body. So Israel is the church and again, is there not passages that seem to indicate that are we not said that we are.
We are made sons and daughters of Abraham by faith and is there not it doesn't even Paul referred to the church as the Israel Of God, I think that's what Galatians 6 means. When it talks about the Israel of God, I think that's referring to the church now.
Dispensationalist will hang me up by my toenails and beat me with a feather for saying so but but but at least We could say if that's what Paul meant when he said the Israel of God is he's referring to all God's people for all time.
Then that would that would fall under that perspective, right? So What is new covenant fulfillment theology? How does it differ new covenant fulfillment theology? Understands type and shadow. So type and shadow gives way to fulfillment.
Type and shadow gives way to fulfillment in this perspective. Israel is A type of shot type and shadow and it's given its fulfillment in Christ and the new covenant the new covenant Church. So you can see there's obvious overlap, right?
There are things that are going to be very similar here that are similar here probably the most distinct of all of them is going to be dispensationalism and Chris didn't talk about dispensationalism in the book.
So that's the one thing I did want to mention and I think Mike's going to mention this next week. Mike and I are both teaching from the book, but neither one of us are bound to the book. I mean, we're gonna bring up things that are not in the book because We can it's our class.
But but in this case, I think it's important because I Won't ask for a show of hands. But I imagine there's some of you who've come tonight that maybe have never heard some of these words before. Right.
I mean a lot of people in America are In churches that are heavily dispensational. But they have never heard that term because it's just this is just the way it is. I give you an example years ago. I used to work at First Coast high schools back when I was in seminary.
I was a Paraprofessional, you know, like a paralegal is not quite a lawyer a paraprofessional not quite a professional now that just means I was a teacher's assistant and I actually ran the Bible Club at First Coast High School and When I was doing a Bible Club meeting one day one of the teachers was sitting in and I said that some people believe in a pre-tribulation rapture and seven-year tribulation and I said But that's just one perspective and the teacher raised her hand.
Wasn't one of the students she raised her hand. She says what do you mean? That's one perspective. That's the only perspective and I said Oh, honey, I Said I appreciate that you're very convinced. But that's not the only end times perspective that exists.
But but if that's all that anyone's ever been taught that's all that they've ever been introduced to then. Yeah, that's gonna be it and they're probably not even going to hear the term dispensational.
They just that's just the way it is but It's important to understand there are differences and there are distinctions and dispensationalism will have the biggest distinctions among the rest because it is essential in dispensational theology to hold that Specific promises made to ethnic Israel will have their ultimate fulfillment in ethnic Israel so By ethnic I mean national Visible Israel.
And The middle part of last century Israel became a state again. Was it 1948? That began in many people's minds the beginning of the end times because they saw that as a fulfillment of the promise to God that he was going to end graft his people again and begin to bless them again and Through that how many of you have seen that even people in our own government are Now supporting Israel not because Israel is always right, but because they feel like they have a biblical Requirement to do so and what do they always cite?
You bless Israel. God will bless you. You curse Israel. God will curse you. What are they saying with that one there? They're I would say misapplying the Abrahamic promise of Genesis 12. But also they're saying this nation this Jewish nation of Israel is The one that receives those promises from God that's what it's doing.
It's saying that that nation over there is Actually who God made the promises to and therefore they're the ones who are going to receive those promises. You see how that creates at least an issue with How we understand not only scripture, but how we understand what's going on around us if we think that the National State of Israel is the Israel of God and they're going to receive all the promises that God made to Israel in the Old Testament if that's how we see it.
Then. Yeah, we're by Necessity force to support that because if we weren't we weren't be supporting God. You see how that leads to? Political behavior it leads to churches that teach things about that that I think are at times Incorrect sometimes even dangerous they say.
So this is why I say these are important things that that we have to we have to work out. So let's go back to dispensationalism. Let's walk through some of the key Points of dispensationalism to make sure we understand by the way, you have your handout here.
I'm gonna walk. I'm not going to walk through the handout specifically like walk through each of these this. There's a reason why I gave you this so you can take it home and you'll have it in your notes and you can look At it.
I'm gonna be reading from my notes. But this is essentially the things that we're going to be addressing are on this. This handout for those of you who are doing the class at home. This will be available on the website for you to download out of Dropbox.
It's not there yet. But it will be there by tomorrow. So if you're taking the class right now, you have to look at it tomorrow all right, so Dispensationalism insists upon a continuing distinction between Israel and the church.
Israel is Israel. The church is the church the coming of Christ does not erase Redefine or transfer God's covenant promises to national Israel in such a way that Israel ceases to be the intended recipient of those promises.
That's the argument of dispensationalism just because Christ came just because Christ has brought the new covenant. It does not redefine or redirect any of the promises God has made to Israel and That's just it.
Israel is Israel. The church is the church and there's a distinction. One of the things you'll often hear in dispensational conversation is you will hear the Argument that the church was born on Pentecost.
Well, we're going to see that there is a sense in which that is correct that there's a there the church is the fulfillment of Those promises and the church, of course. There is the falling of the Holy Spirit the filling of the Holy Spirit the giving of the tongues and those things that happen on Pentecost but the whole idea in Dispensationalism when it talks about the church being born on Pentecost is the idea that the church didn't exist until then.
Right like like it didn't have it was this separate and distinct entity. And that's an important thing. Now what I'm about to say. And I try to be fair to my dispensational brothers and I try not to ever straw man.
What I'm about to say will be accused of straw manning, but understand that what I'm about to say Has been taught in dispensational circles, but it is not what is currently believed. So I'm going back a little ways to what was taught.
There was a time We go back in the past where it was taught. That the church was a parenthesis in the plan of God that God's plan was for Israel and God's plan is for Israel in The future so you have Israel in the past Israel in the future and in the middle.
Is known as the church age now brother Mike. Didn't you do the ages of the church or the seven dispensation seven dispensations now. I don't have time tonight to do the seven dispensations. But if you were in Sunday school Sunday, he talked about these you can go back and listen to his class.
It's it's on our YouTube page and go back. Because they don't just have these ages they would go back and they would say there's the age of innocence. Which was the time of Adam and Eve they would say there's the age of human government which comes under Noah there's the age of the patriarchs, which is Abraham Isaac Jacob, there's the age of the law, which is Moses then there is Christ the age of the church and then there's coming the Millennial Kingdom and the Millennial Kingdom is when the focus is again on Israel because where's Jesus gonna rain from during the morning?
You're gonna rain from Israel where the promise is going to be fulfilled in Israel. Jesus is going to sit on David's throne and rule in David's land. He is going to fulfill those promises. So in that sense church the church age becomes a parenthesis in the plan of God.
Again more modern dispensationalists don't say that so I don't want to. I don't want to caricature them. But the whole idea of this distinction between Israel in the church. This is part and parcel of how that works itself out in the minds of some people that there's this hard distinction.
Now The Dispensationalist argues that the New Testament does not authorize us to collapse Israel into the church. God made specific promises to Abraham Isaac Jacob Jacob's physical descendants and the nation of Israel and these Promises are concerning seed land nationhood kingdom Davidic kingship and restoration.
Therefore when God promises something to Israel the original recipient matters. God's faithfulness Requires him to fulfill his promises as they were actually given and the Dispensationalist concern is that any other system all these other three systems?
Allow the New Testament to change the meaning of the Old Testament promises. That's their argument. They say if you take any of these other views you're saying God made a promise and then he changed it.
God made a promise and then he changed it so You understand their concern right? I mean trying to be fair to them. They're saying well God made this promise to these people if he doesn't fulfill his promise to these people.
Then God's not faithful and that's something none of us can abide by right? None of us can abide that God's not faithful. We have to believe God is faithful and I don't think any of these other systems says that God is unfaithful.
But that's their concern. They are concerned that if there's any changes or any Reinterpretation of those promises then God is somehow unfaithful. Okay. Dispensationalism normally will argue most specifically for a future ethnic and national Israel as Israel.
They tend to base this on Romans 11 specifically verse 1 and verses 25 and 26. Romans 11 1 says God has God rejected his people and the answer No, I Mean Paul says no God is not by no means. It's the it's that strong Greek Emphatic know the mega noita may it never be right may it never exist.
So the idea has God rejected his people. The answer is no. Now if we just stop there in Two chapters before that in Romans chapter 9. What did Paul say about Israel? Not all Israel is Israel right like so even Paul makes a distinction between True Israel and that which is not true Israel.
So so at least we have to interpret that in light of What came before it? But then there is this passage Romans 11 25 and 26 It says a partial hardening has come upon Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in and in this way All Israel will be saved.
And that phrase is often grabbed on to all Israel will be saved. I've had people use that in very dangerous ways. Probably the most explicitly dangerous way and I think I've told the story here before but some of you are new.
Years ago I was watching Pat Robertson if you don't know who Pat Robertson was he was the head of the 700 Club and that was a Christian television program and Pat Robertson was sitting across the table from a Jewish man and the Jewish man said to Pat Robertson.
He said well, I am a Jew I don't believe in Jesus that means you think I'm not going to heaven and I promise you Pat Robertson's response was these very words. He says no the Bible says all Israel will be saved.
So you're okay. That is a dangerous wrong understanding of Romans 11 24 to Romans 11 25 and 26 because when it says all Israel will be saved that Immediately raises the question what is being who's the all who's the Israel?
What does it mean to be saved? How is this being used? How is this being used? I? Don't have time tonight to actually eat the whole thing, but I'll tell you the one thing. I know it don't mean It does not mean that every ethnic Jew is going to be saved simply by virtue of being Jewish.
How do I know that? As the Apostle Paul said again two chapters earlier if I could give myself for the salvation of my brethren I would right if I could be accursed for the salvation of my brethren and according to the flesh who is who?
Jewish people he said if I could do that I would and what does that mean? It means they're not automatically saved simply because they have Abraham's blood running through their veins and Dispensationalists don't believe that dispensationalists at least modern progressive dispensationalists do not believe that.
Someone is saved merely by being Jewish. I remember hearing John MacArthur say this very specifically. He said Jews are not saved just because they're Jews. He said that to Ben Shapiro remember MacArthur sat across from Jim Ben Shapiro.
And he said you have to trust in Jesus. Jesus is your Messiah, and you've rejected him. He was very clear praise God that somebody was willing to say that even on their own show. So I'm not saying this is something that dispensationalists believe.
I'm saying this whole idea of all Israel being saved becomes an issue and Many of them interpret it to mean there is coming a future restoration for Ethnic National Israel that includes the nation-state of Israel where all of the land promises will be fulfilled all of the seed promises will be fulfilled and all of the Restoration promises will be fulfilled in the nation of Israel with the Jewish people that's the the stronghold and that's their understanding of this and this is why dispensationalism is.
Premillennial time doesn't allow me to do much with this but millennium refers to that thousand-year period that's mentioned in Revelation chapter 20. Mike's going to be explaining that in a few weeks in Sunday school, so if you're not coming to Sunday school.
What's wrong with you? But you should be coming to Sunday school because he's doing a great walk through Revelation teaching through that and he's going to be. Talking about we hold to an all millennial position here at the church but premillennialism Says that when Christ returns he's going to set up a thousand-year kingdom on this earth.
He is going to rule and reign for a thousand years on this earth from Jerusalem and the dispensational premillennialist says. That's when the promises are going to be fulfilled. The land promise the seed promise all of those promises of restoration are going to be fulfilled in that kingdom.
If that's what happens. Okay, like how would be there one way or the other but I don't think that's what it means. But it's one of those times I did it last year. I was in West Virginia, I did a three-man debate on the subject of eschatology and and there was a there was a Wonderful Korean gentleman who was representing the premillennial position and he did he said about me the same thing I just said he said if Keith is right.
But you know, we all agree that no matter who's right about this at the end we're all going to be with Christ. We're all going to be in the new heavens in the new earth the question is is there going to be this intermediate kingdom and The dispensationalist would say there has to be because that's where the promises are going to be fulfilled.
That's that's the point of there. That's why I said all dispensationalists have to hold two things one a distinction in between Israel and the church and to premillennialism. Because that's where the promises are going to be fulfilled.
Make sense. All right. All right now I have ten minutes to do the other three. That one was an important one though that I wanted to make the distinction. Okay, so Super session ism says the church has replaced Israel as God's covenant people following Israel's rejection of the Messiah, so this sees the church as Not as much a fulfillment of Israel, but replacing Israel because Israel gave up or forfeited their promise.
See how that does introduce a different idea. Israel had a promise, but that promise was conditional. They failed to meet the condition so God took the promise away from them gave it to the church. This is typically what is referred to when you hear people that are railing against replacement theology.
Because they're saying God had given Israel promises and then he took him away. See how that that would be hard to hard to take right? That's that that's this is classic super session ism and where dispensationalism Emphasizes or I'm sorry, excuse me the the The church replaces Israel's God's covenant people following Israel's rejection of the Messiah the promises and privileges that once belonged to Israel.
Not now belong to the church. Israel was God's chosen people. Now. The church is God's chosen people. That's super session ism. Much of it is based on parables like the parable from Matthew 2143 where it says the kingdom will be taken away from you and given to a people.
Producing its fruits the word people. Mike and I talked about this today. There's a word nation, right in that will we discuss? Yeah, F net, right? It's going to be it's gonna be given to a different people a different nation, right?
It's gonna be taken from you. It's gonna be given to them. We see how they get there. We see how they arrive at that conclusion. This position takes the covenant judgment language of the New Testament.
Seriously Jesus does pronounce judgment on Israel, right? We know that's true. He well upon unbelieving Israel Jesus does pronounce judgment upon them and there are things that happen as a result of that judgment most specifically in 8070 right here's the here's a big part of this now.
We all agree what happened in 8070 did bring the old cat old covenant system to a halt. We would say the old covenant was finished when Christ died on the cross because that's when the new new covenant begins.
But the old covenant system like I've used the example of passing the baton in a race. There's that in-between period right? We see this time where there is still a covenant. The old covenant is Exercising but it's no longer it's been superseded by the new covenant right in that sense.
But what does God do in 8070? Destroy the temple no more sacrifice. No more Judaism or no more Temple Judaism no more practicing of that that faith. Not in the way that it was intended through the temple sacrifices.
So they would say this is an example of the proof of what they're saying that Israel not only had its promises taken away, but it received judgment from God and Now The church receives the promises of God.
Okay, that's classic supersessionism the concern with this position is that it seems to position Israel as plan a and the church as plan B and that in and of itself Would lead to the conclusion and it could lead to the conclusion on that that This wasn't God's design but rather this was his backup plan.
The church was never God's backup plan. The church was God's plan from the beginning. That's that's that's that's where the issue comes with this if you see the church well Israel failed so God gave it to somebody else because.
Yeah. There had to be a plan B. That would be a wrong way of understanding and that's where this could be an issue. That's where understanding this could be an issue. As I said, not everything here is wrong but These are some of the areas where we would say here's here's where an issue could arise.
Thirdly reform covenant theology. The basic assertion of reform covenant theology is that God has always had one covenant people throughout redemptive history. The church has not replaced Israel. The church is Israel.
That's reform covenant theology. There's one covenant two administrations. Israel is the church where dispensationalism emphasizes distinction. Reform covenant theology emphasizes continuity. Continuity.
In fact you will hear this a lot if you have friends who are Presbyterians. I spend a lot of time with Presbyterians. Love them. And I know Bill has. Bill's goes to a reform seminary, right? So we have a lot of people that we would respect.
R .C. Sproul one of my Most beloved teachers that I've ever had the opportunity to learn from. This would be the perspective and you would often hear them talk about the continuity between the old covenant and the new covenant.
They would they would talk about the church under the law. That was a phrase. It's often used you have the church under the law and the church under grace. Because and this is true the term ecclesia Is the word that we understand is the New Testament word for church.
It's the Greek word for church that is used in the Septuagint at times to refer to the assembly of Israel. Because the word ecclesia simply means the assembly. It's you know, it can be etymologically broken down to the called out ones.
But as it was used in the time it's referring to those who are assembled there. They're called out of their homes. They're assembled together and that's why we say to be the church. We come together, right?
We are the church. So In that sense did is did Old Testament Israel have a sense in which it was? The ecclesia. Well, the language is used there. Sure. Okay, but in this model you end up with two administrations with very little difference.
See if I can explain this in an easy way. This is where the paedo-baptist credo-baptist argument really comes in. Because in the Old Covenant the promises Were to the to the person in the Covenant and to their offspring.
This is why the offspring would receive the sign of the Covenant. What was the sign of the Covenant in the Old Testament? Circumcision. What is the sign of the New Covenant? Now that's a that's a that's a.
This is actually a deeply theological question. Let me say what is the external sign of entrance into the New Covenant because we can say regeneration is the sign of the New Covenant but there's there's an external thing that accompanies our Regeneration doesn't cause it.
We don't believe in baptism regeneration, but it accompanies our regeneration. We are we believe we regenerate we believe and then we are Baptized and here's what they would say. They would say if an infant in the Old Testament Was made a part of the Covenant.
Then why would an infant in the New Testament? Not be made part of the Covenant and because they believe in that Continuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant it makes sense and it stands to reason that you would apply the covenant sign to the infant in the New Covenant the same way you would apply the covenant sign to the infant in the Old Covenant and therein lies their argument for continuity between the covenants.
It's Logical, I don't think it's right something can be logical and not correct, but that's where the argument comes from. And again, they have many verses that they would look to they would say for instance Galatians 3 7 those who are of faith Are the sons of Abraham?
They would say see that Israel is the sons of Abraham church the sons of Abraham. We're all one people of God and here's the funny thing. I'm preaching John 10 this week. I don't think I'll get all the way to this verse but in John 10 Jesus actually says I have sheep that are not of this fold and I must bring them in as well and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
Which means ultimately we are one people of God so there is some truth to this. Again, I'm not I'm not. I'm not Equivocating and saying they're all right. I'm saying they're not all wrong. All right there there are issues that arise with each of them and I think the one here is it refuses to see any proper distinctions and rightfully understood distinctions between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and That's where I think the issues mainly exist in Reform Covenant theology.
In fact, I well time doesn't allow but there are there are other issues like there are those who believe that the administration of the Holy Spirit was the exact same in the Old Covenant as he is in the New Covenant.
I don't believe that. In fact when I preach through John 13 through 15 Jesus very specifically talks about a new administration of the Spirit the very fact that the the Spirit is going to do a New work in the church that is a distinction between that and the Old Covenant.
I believe the Spirit worked in the Old Covenant. I believe the Spirit worked on people in the Old Covenant. Please don't think I'm saying the Spirit was absent in the Old Covenant. But the promise of the New Covenant is the indwelling baptism of the Holy Spirit.
It is a it is a he will dwell with you forever that is a distinction of the New Covenant and He would dwell in you back in the New Covenant. What are we sold if you don't have the Spirit of Christ within you?
You're not his Romans 8 verse 8. But I have friends I have very good Presbyterian friends who would say the Holy Spirit's Administration and the life of the believer was the same in the Old Covenant as it is in the New Covenant and I would disagree I would disagree, but that's what I'm talking about that that strong where where dispensationalism focuses on distinction covenant theology focuses on Continuity continuation continuity.
All right, give me five more minutes. All right, sir, yeah, thank you. Okay now. The thing is this last one. It's okay for me to spend less time on because the next several weeks We're going to be unfolding all of this.
This last one is what this class really is about and that is New Covenant fulfillment theology. The governing concept is not distinction. It's not replacement. It's not continuity. It is Fulfillment that is the governing concept of New Covenant fulfillment theology not distinction not replacement not continuation or continuity but fulfillment.
If you want to write a passage down for this a good passage would be Colossians chapter 2 verses 16 and 17. Colossians chapter 2. The Apostle Paul is speaking to the church at Colossae and he is telling them not to let Themselves Pete be judged for not participating in the ceremonies of the Old Covenant.
And what he says specifically is he says let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival a new moon or a Sabbath all of those things relate to the The what we would call if you were breaking it down to tripartite and there was issues with that.
But just for now if we're breaking down ceremonial law for the Old Covenant that included what you ate what you drank. When you celebrated festivals right new moons were the monthly festivals, right? And the Sabbath's which are the weekly festival.
So you had the annual Feasts you had the monthly observations and the weekly Observation which is the Sabbath and he says let no one judge you in accordance to what you eat and drink to the Festivals to the new moons and to the Sabbath's and then was the very next thing.
He says these are a shadow. These are a shadow of the things to come. But the substance belongs to Christ. These are a shadow of the things to come but the substance belongs to Christ. Israel by design.
Pointed beyond itself. That's the key to this. Israel by design. Was meant to point beyond itself. Old Testament. Israel was real. The land was real. The temple was real. The priesthood was real. The sacrifices were real.
The Kings were real. The Covenant was real. But real does not mean ultimate. Real does not mean ultimate. The tabernacle was real yet. Hebrews says it was a copy in a shadow. Go back and read Hebrews.
It says the temple was a copy in a shadow. But it was real. It existed, but it was a copy in a shadow. The sacrifices were real. But what does Hebrews tell us about them the blood and bulls of goats? Does not take away sin.
What do they do? They point to the film which is Jesus Christ. The priesthood was real. But what did it do? Pointed to Jesus Christ. In fact, Jesus has a greater priesthood. He's not even a Levite. He is a part of the Melchizedekian priesthood right.
God appointed priesthood of Melchizedek. David was a real king. Yet he pointed ultimately to the son of David Jesus Christ. Why should we assume? That the nation of Israel itself was not also in one sense typological.
Pointing to that which is greater if all of these other things point to the greater. Why would we not then come to the same conclusion regarding the nation of Israel? Now, how does this differ from classic covenant theology?
Both systems can look very similar. Both of these will look very similar. There will be overlap, of course. Because both say there's one Savior. Salvation is always by grace. Christ fulfills the promises.
Gentiles inherit Abrahamic blessings. No necessary future restoration of the Mosaic order. All those things are agreed upon by both of these systems. But the redemptive historical models do differ. Covenant theology says Christ in the church.
Excuse me says the church and Israel are the same just two administrations. The fundamental spiritual entity remains continuous. It's just administered differently. New covenant fulfillment says Israel was the shadow.
Christ is a fulfillment and the new covenant church is the substance of that fulfillment. And that is a stronger Discontinuity, so this would say yes, there is continuity, but it's not it's not discontinuity here.
But there's a stronger discontinuity than That which is found in classic reformed covenant theology the new covenant is Qualitatively different than the old covenant. That's one of the strong emphases in this position.
That the new covenant is qualitatively different. What is one of the things that were promised in the new covenant that were not promised in the old covenant? They shall all Know me. Jeremiah chapter 31 that is the promise of the new covenant.
Everyone in the new covenant is regenerate. They shall all know me. They want to tell each one. Isn't that know his neighbor know the Lord. They won't each one have to tell his neighbor know the Lord because they will all know me.
This is the hope this is by the way. This is what Baptists if you think the issue between Baptists and Presbyterians is about Baptizing babies. It's really not. It's about who's in the covenant. We are not in the covenant by birth.
We're in the covenant by new birth. It says in John chapter 1 very specifically Jesus came unto his own. His own received him not but to as many as received him. He gave them the power to become the children of God who were born not of the flesh.
Not of the will of man. But of God. I left out one in there. I'm doing by memory, but you don't thought about that verse. It says we're not born of the flesh but born of the Spirit. That's How the new covenant is distinct and Jeremiah or Ezekiel 36 follows us up.
It says we'll be given a new heart. That's the another promise that we have of the new covenant. In the old covenant physical descendants created covenant membership. But in the new covenant new birth creates covenant membership.
That's the distinction. This is not merely an administrative ascent difference. Of the same community. It is a movement from type to reality now. How does this differ from dispensationalism? Well, both systems want to defend God's faithfulness, but they define faithfulness differently.
Dispensationalism says God is faithful because he will ultimately fulfill his promises to the people to whom he originally made them new covenant fulfillment. Theology says God is faithful because the promises always pointed through Israel toward Christ in whom the intended substance is perfectly realized.
It's always been about Christ. It's not all about Israel. It's all about Jesus. Israel points to Jesus not the other way around. The theological heart of new covenant fulfillment theology is ultimately that Christ is the fulfillment of the promises given to Israel and we share in those promises through union with him.
We are united with Christ from the foundation of the world and We experience that union with Christ through regeneration and faith. That's it. That's it. How do Gentiles receive Israel's promises? By being united to Christ.
How do Jews receive Israel's promises by being united to Christ. Jesus says I am the vine. You are the branches. It is through union with him that we experience the promises that God has given now. The question this course as I said is not whether God keeps his promises to Israel.
He absolutely does. The question is how scripture itself tells us those promises reach their intended fulfillment. Our thesis will be that God's promises do not bypass Israel nor do they fail because of Israel.
They move through Israel to Israel's Messiah and reach their intended substance in him and in those united to him all right, so. Not bad. We went ten minutes past time, but we said this class was going to go to about 40 after.
Does anyone have any? Questions that they would like for us to ask before I ask brother Mike to close us in prayer and we'll shut off the live Stream and take other prayer requests. Was that was that clear?
Yes, it's clear as mud. I'm sure.
All right. We would love your son more and I'd be able to proclaim him better and serve you better.