Quote:
|
If they equate replacement theology with covenant theology, then covenant theology is heresy???
|
That is exactly what they are saying, though, in fairness they are saying that with a completely false understanding of what CT is.
Bruce is right on the money, and it is exactly the best way to respond to those who hate "Replacement Theology."
Quote:
|
Replacement theology is in my mind just another strand of dispensationalism, an attempt to disasociate the Church from the Old Testament. How can you understand the new covenant properly when you seperate it from the old covenant?
|
You can't. But this question reveals just how shallow their understanding of CT is. By saying the Church
replaces Israel, they are showing they are ignorant of the fact that CT-proponents believe the Church existed in the OT. And there is no possible way these folks could summarize our define our position as concisely as Bruce did.
All they have to do is memorize that short post, and they would know what CT is, in contrast to their rhetoric of replacement. Though, it is longer than one sentence, and is more difficult to argue with
They have a vested interest in remaining ignorant and over-simplified. It makes them think they win.
Sorry, this is a particular beef of mine, and maybe my tone is too harsh to these men who could be my brothers in the Lord. But messing with Christ's role as the True Vine really gets under my skin.