 | Q75 : Two New Covenants? |
| Q75 : Two New Covenants? |
| Q75 : Two New Covenants? I just read the article by Andy Woods entitled What is the relationship of the Church to the New Covenanta. You state the following:
The two-covenant view also suffers from other flaws. According to Toussaint: "Paul was clear in his delineation between the church and Israel in God's program (Romans 9-11). Why then would he not have been specific in pointing out the difference between two new covenants?" Dr. Rodney J Decker also used a quote from Walvoord in the Bib Sac article of 1980. Miles J Stanford took the position that Walvoord's position had not changed: http://withchrist.org/MJS/decker2.htm. Any thoughts?
Links Mentioned Above a - See http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/12/12.htm. |
| A75 : by Andy Woods Although I did not mention it in my paper, some of my views regarding Walvoord's view of the New Covenant come from conversations that I have had with Dr. Pentecost on the subject. He indicated to me that both Walvoord and Ryrie had switched from the two the covenant view to a single covenant with the church participating in its soteriological benefits. He also indicated to me that Chafer would also have switched had he lived long enough. Interestingly, Pentecost held this single covenant view before these men switched as evidenced by his treatment on the subject in Things to Comea which was his doctoral dissertation. Pentecost held this position even as a student while studying under Dr. Chafer. I think some of Walvoord's later language that Stanford quotes should be understood as Walvoord being clear that the church is not the ultimate fulfillment of the New Covenant. I do not think that Walvoord is here saying that the church has no relationship to the New Covenant. Anyway, these are some of my thoughts on this interesting topic.
Links Mentioned Above a - See http://www.bestbookdeal.com/book/compare/0-310-30890-9. |