The Blaze: Covenant Theology and Supercessionism

Hi all!

Today, Billy Hallowell penned an article in "The Blaze," where he highlighted some points made by Grant Barry on the issue of Israel's place in the end times. I don't really want to get into the minutia of end times prophecy, but I do want to highlight an inaccuracy in the article. 

We here at Pressing On Podcast have identified ourselves as dispensationalists. We see a distinction between the Church and Israel within the one people of God, each having its own distinct purpose in, and relationship to, the New Covenant in Christ. However, we do part ways with most of our dispensationalist brothers and sisters in that we don't find any benefit in having our fists eternally raised at what is often treated as the false idol of replacement theology. In the ongoing discussion of how Israel and the Church relate to one another, both sides must be committed to honesty and integrity in how we represent the other side. No progress will ever be made if misrepresentation is the norm.

That said, I want to kind of stand up for my Covenant Theology brethren. The article in The Blaze paints an "either or" picture of the Church and Israel.

 Either you see a distinction, or the Church has replaced Israel. A couple of problems here:

1) If the Church has replaced Israel, then you still see them as two distinct groups. If both groups are actually one group, then no one has actually replaced anyone. True "Replacement Theology" requires a distinction (if not entire separation) between the two. If one is making the assertion, like Holloway seems to assert by saying, "...“Israel” actually refers to the contemporary Christian church...," that someone who holds that view is holding to "Replacement Theology," then what you've done is imposed Dispensational distinctives onto a system that does not recognize them.

2) Enter Covenant Theology. While Dispensationalism focuses on discontinuity, CT focuses on continuity. This means that while dispensationalists see a discontinuity in the people of God, CT sees only continuity. So, "Replacement Theology" doesn't make a whole lot of sense, because the Church is Israel, and Israel is the Church. There can be no replacement if there is no difference. I don't want to go over the minutia of this subject right now, but if you want a deeper look at this, try here. The main thing that I want to express is that Covenant Theology does not see two distinct groups, but rather, two manifestations of the same group- the one Elect people of God.


Over the years, there have been many back and forth battles between Dispensationalists and Covenant Theologians, a ton of unnecessary mud flinging. However, if we are to all take part in the wonderful history of theology, and keep the flow of doctrine flowing onwards, purifying and refining ever further- then we have got to start addressing each other's points of view as it they are expressed by each party, not as we would like to address them in our own pejorative way. This especially goes for articles written for larger news/religion/theology blogs. The conversation will go no further if the major points are not being addressed properly. Each one of us is responsible for our own words.


In Him,

Mike Senders

The Woods is a Nice Place

Hey all,

Happy New Year! Took a week off recording for a week to celebrate and have a bit of time off, but we'll be back in the studio again this week to record a new episode. The topic this time will be communion, and I don't want to spoil it, nor do I want to box us in when it comes time to record, but I thought I'd maybe go over one aspect of communion that's pretty applicable to our lives on a day to day basis. 

The woods is a nice place. I happen to be an avid fisherman, and I also love aquariums and recently I've been putting the two together and keeping native species in my aquarium. It's extremely enjoyable. The time alone, the quiet of the trees, the sound of the water is extremely pleasing to me. On a spiritual level, it's quite invigorating. (A little fun fact- in the 1600s, while Bunyan's "A Pilgrim's Progress" was enjoying bestseller status, the number 2 bestseller at the time was a book called "The Compleat Angler," by Izaak Walton, which was actually about both theology and fishing.) 

Getting all alone can seem like a spiritual draw to many of us. That old joke about how "church would be so great if it wasn't for that darned front door" sometimes has more validity to it than some would like to admit. Church comes with a lot of annoyances. Disagreements, politics, culture clashes &c., can all get in the way of our desired Sunday morning in the woods.

Some people graciously smile and take it for what it is. Some people love it so completely that they become pastors and elders. Still others take a different route- the woods. Forsaking fellowship is a real big deal for people, and happens more often than we realise. Of course we all know someone who at some point has said, "I don't want to get up on Sunday," and thinks that [planning to] turning on the radio is Church enough, but I'm not talking about that, that's just called being lazy. I'm talking about those who wilfully forsake fellowship- communion- in order to lead a monastic-ish lifestyle.

As a student of the Bible, someone who considers higher thought and deeper insight a necessary and invigorating thing, and feels Spiritually called to be so, the draw to be alone and not deal with others is enticing. I mean come on- who hasn't disagreed with the Pastor over his usage of, or oversight of, some specific theological insight that wasn't the main focus of his sermon? Or dealt with laypeople who don't want to attend your Sunday school class because they want something more practical, usually in the form of "inductive Bible studies" that amount to nothing more than glossing over the important issues? Viewing church this way builds ourselves up into a Spiritual mountain. A lonely mountain. A large, vast, lonely mountain standing in the middle of a lake. And it is entirely sinful.

Theological nitpicking is usually the sign of a deeper sin issue. When we can't listen to a sermon without treating it like a seminary lecture, it's sign that we are out of touch with the application of all the actual lectures we've heard. Our Pastors are put in place by God to feed us, shepherd us, in a way that the Spirit has lead them. The pastor speaks both to individuals and to a body. While there is of course an intentional thrust that the pastor is intending as speaking to a singular body, who are we to say that the Spirit does not have individual intentions, to the point that the message speaks in a very personal, and unique way to every single congregant? When we disagree with what we're hearing, why could it not simply be that the Spirit is speaking to us in such a way as to cause us to further meditate on an issue that we, in our arrogance, think that we have exhausted? Or even when we hear repetitious sermons of things that we agree with, is the "I already knew that, nothing new here" attitude demonstrative of a softened, receptive spirit with an attitude of learning and growth? I think not. As a matter of fact, when I catch myself doing that, I have to immediately  remind myself that if I think I already know something, it's probably proof that I don't know it in the way that I should. 

Building ourselves into giant mountains of deep theological truth, higher than, and separated from, other people is the opposite of communion. What is knowledge of it has no personal application? What is knowledge, if it isn't imparted to others? And don't tell me "I talk to people online"- you're not fooling anyone. Communion means being together with others, being bound to them, being one with them. Seeking solidarity against community is not unity, but disunity.

The individuals who make up the body find their identity in Christ. We share our identity because we have only been joined to each other by his work. Seeking solidarity takes Christ away from others and makes him ours alone. It means building a new body made up of only two, me and Jesus- oh wait- I meant to say "my version of Jesus." The Christ of the Bible is the head of the whole of the church. Forsaking fellowship with the body means to forsake fellowship with Christ. You cannot be both a lone mountain, or live in the woods, and be pa member of a body, the two are antithetical to each other. Communion is only found in coming together- not in separation.

When we come to the Lod's Supper, we are declaring, praising, and worshipping God for what Christ has done for us- for our "shalom" we have with God through Christ as members of his body. This is not simply an adoration of communion with Christ individually, but communion with others as a single body made up of many individuals. A mountain standing in a lake looks great on a calendar- but it's unapproachable and good for no practical use in its own right.

In sum, don't go to the woods, and if you must, don't build a house out there. Come back. Communion is found in fellowship, and fellowship through being a part of the body of Christ. You can't do that when you're all by yourself. 

God Bless,

Mike Senders