Clearing Up Confusion Over Distinctions #1

Over at the MidWest Center for Theological Studies, of which (among others) Dr. Sam Waldron and Mr. Richard Barcelous are a major part, Dr. Waldron has been critiquing Barry Horner's Book, "Future Israel" by way of a series of blog articles. In his latest post, "Future Israel by Barry Horner # 19", Waldron addressed the potential anticipation for a primarily material Kingdom, which is the tendency of premillennialism (my assessment).

The thread of comments that followed very quickly veered off topic (and I blame myself in part). But among those involved in the discussion was a man named Jim McDermott. The intention of this post is to create a forum to continue the discussion were are reluctant to elaborate on in the comment thread over at the Illumination, since it was off topic.

So, I invite Jim to comment here anticipating the evolution of our discussion. Below I will quote one of his comments and my response, which are both included in the thread at the link above.

Comment # 10 Written by: Jim McDermott Posted on: April 28, 2008 at 3:10 pm

"Dr. Waldron and (soon-to-be-Dr.) Prof. Barcellos’ Reformed Baptist Manifesto: The New Covenant as the Constitution of the Church (as I recall the subtitle) and/or Dr. Thomas Schreiner’s Believers’ Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ are helpful books which probably wouldn’t be avoided by instant readers.

My (Scripture-based) presupposition is that ethnic/national Israel, with a small number of notable exceptions, was comprised of unbelievers. As Hebrews, especially chs. 7 and 8, unequivocally reveals, the Old Covenant was merely a type (”shadow”) of the New Covenant (substance/realilty).

Presupposition (Spirit-quenching) as to ethnic/national Israel other than that it was an unbelieving type is the root of all* major error extant among the Church (error among the church is resultant from absence of regeneration).

* Ultimately, the New Covenant is denied [eg. not for us/now or merely the second administration of one (man-invented) “Covenant of Grace”]; hence, ultimately, the New Heart is denied; hence, a myriad of error including “carnal christians”, “second blessing”, anthropocentric soteriology, etc"


Comment # 11 Written by: Jason Payton Posted on: April 28, 2008 at 6:25 pm

"Jim,

I have read Waldron and Barcelous’ book and perhaps I should re-read the part on baptism.

Let me try to rephrase your statements into positive assertions to see if I understand what you are saying:

1. Ethnic/national Israel was the unbelieving type of the New Covenant Church.

2. The negated form of assertion #1 is an unbiblical presupposition.

3. The denial of #1 has lead to the aberrant doctrines of “canal Christianity”, “second blessing theology”, and “anthropocentric soteriology”.

Please correct these 3 assertions if they are not yours, and if they are (perhaps on another forum, b/c this seems a bit off topic) please back up the assertions made in #3."

Well, Jim, it's your turn so to speak. Don't hesitate to suggest the inclusion of more comments from the thread at Illumination.