Covenant Theology Compared to Dispensationalism

[@timpczman]

Very fair presentation on Covenant vs Dispensation positions. I am solidly on the Literal Reading and Dispensational understanding.

[@anthonyanderson9771]

I have to give kudos to you. Throughout your talk I felt you would lean to one side, then the other side, and I was thoroughly surprised at your answer. Thank you for presenting yourself objectively. Thank you for doing this. I might have to check out the book!

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Anthony! I appreciate your feedback and encouragement. ❤️

[@DawntoduskNetAuTas]

Congratulations. I love your irenic, objective and analytical approach.

[@michaelmagee4318]

Very well done Pastor. Fair and balanced and full of valuable information. Thanks!

[@PastorTanner]

My pleasure. God bless. 👍

[@mtngirlbunny9290]

This is my first encounter with your channel and the sorting out of these theologies! Great job sharing the points of views and some jarring questions with each...lol!! Brain is cramping as I continue on my journey of knowing God and His Word!😄 Thank you for replying to my other comments down the page. Eager to hear more of your videos....new subscriber! God Bless!

[@timothyjones74]

This commentary is very helpful. Baptists seem to me to be so religious that they turn off would be converts. As a former Unitarian Universalist, I know Jesus is the answer to all of my questions. These topics seem to be very divisive. You are blazing an important “peace agreement”among those who seek to be “right” and divide us. God bless your efforts 🙏

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Timothy! In appreciate your love and support. There is an inherent divisiveness that comes with many Christian denominations. Check out my video on fundamentalism for some of my further thoughts on that: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mommd6WBgbOrd6s

[@jimpemberton]

This video is almost a year old and I'm only now finding it. I'm probably more of a Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology guy (I graduated from Reformed Baptist Seminary with a Master of Theological Studies). I agree with the covenants being progressive at least insofar as they are progressively revelatory, but that most of them are limited to the first book of the Torah as supporting the Mosaic Covenant indicates that their importance at being progressively revelatory ended with Moses. More significant than whether one is literalistic or figurative is to what extent we allow our systematic theology to inform our exegesis. In discussions with our Presbyterian brothers I've questioned their use of certain passages and have gotten the answer that we have to use our systematic theology to exegete these passages. That's not a good thing. Rather, it's important to exegete first and then adjust the system accordingly, even if we have to dismiss significant aspects of dearly held beliefs - like paedobaptism. I'm teaching a class on this this summer at church entitled "Why We're Baptists" and it goes into the history of the development of credobaptism in the English Reformation. I won't have some of the detail you have here, but it's good to hear that someone else is making the same kinds of observations I am.

[@PastorTanner]

Fantastic comment, Jim. I agree that our Presbyterian brothers are too beholden to their systematics. Good luck with your future lesson!

[@jordankirk3634]

Have you listened to James White’s fairly recent sermon series on baptism? It’s fantastic

[@jimpemberton]

@@jordankirk3634 I haven't seen that yet. Good lead. Thanks.

[@PastorTanner]

@@jordankirk3634 i have not. I’ll have to check it out.

[@BishopEddie5443]

If you adhere to denominationalism you are ignorant of the fact that there's not one denomination in the entire Bible.

[@painteroflove]

Great ! Just the type of overview I was looking for... no, BETTER than I knew to look for. Thanks !!!

[@PastorTanner]

Awesome! Glad you enjoyed. :)

[@thatsabigoof509]

Hello Pastor Tanner, thank you for this video. It is wonderful that you could provide such a succinct and objective review.

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you so much, oof! I appreciate you.

[@jeremyhobson4295]

Something in this video at minute 5:07 is very important that we define. What are the last days and end times; not defined by 20th century Christians but defined by the Bible?

[@PastorTanner]

Good question, Jeremy. I feel that this is important to answer.

[@DutchMcGinnis]

Many Christians argue and divide over these issues yet in the end, it doesn't really matter. Will one be punished for taking a position? No. Will one be sinful for taking a position? No. The same goes for eschatology.

[@PastorTanner]

I generally agree with this, however I do feel Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism is a little more important than eschatology because it colors how you read the entirety of the Bible. However, I really appreciate your attitude toward secondary doctrines.

[@DutchMcGinnis]

@@PastorTanner I did read over Hebrews 8 and I would say verse 13 is the most prolific. But I would agree that reading Hebrews 8 does put one into introspection.

[@dmchott]

I have questioned this exact thing myself often. As an unmarried and content to remain so female, I apologize and don't mean to offend any here. However, I have a question. How can we NOT say that we will not stand before God in judgment because we believed a falsehood? I understand we wouldn't suffer eternal punishment, but couldn't this take away from when we will face God and give account for all that we have done? Why suffer to have believed a lie? I struggle in particular because I have a dear Aunt and Uncle who are Pentecostal, and it tears me up to know she is believing in falsehood.

[@Lj-md9ng]

I’m always trying to figure out with dispensation ideology how do we fit Isaiah 56 through 66 ? Like if God mentioned the strangers embracing the sabbath and if it doesn’t matter anymore for me kinda hard to make the Bible flow in certain respects. The same can be said regarding eating swine flesh. If God gonna judge those who eat in the future and it hasn’t happened yet how do we interpret in light of the New Testament?

[@StrahaoftheRace]

The real problem is when people start worshipping the state of Israel. You will be punished for that.

[@mwesley24]

9:05: Nestle Aland text, why aren't you using the Textus Receptus?

[@PastorTanner]

Cause NA is the first one that came up.

[@mwesley24]

@@PastorTanner fair enough 🤣 I enjoyed your video BTW!

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, mvaller. Take care!

[@julieschneider8335]

Wow, you really succeeded in fair-mindedness. I understand so much more about the difference in covenental and dispensational theology, and understand precisely where my beliefs fall. And then, I was surprised at where yours lie...that's how fair your presentation is. Good work. Thank you for this tool.

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you! Take care.

[@leannewiedmayer1546]

Thank you for this, it's refreshing to hear both sides discussed without leaning or even malice. 🤗 Dispensationist here.

[@rossclark1497]

A separate line of enquiry: predestination, and the extent to which each view buys into that.

[@MicahBBurke]

The Mosaic covenant is described in Gal 3 - a temporary addendum to reveal sin.

[@PastorTanner]

Yes, Galatians 3 is a very important passage on this subject. Thanks for sharing.

[@EternalVisionToday]

This was very helpful. Dispensationalist here!

[@PastorTanner]

Very nice, Eternal Vision. Thanks for your encouragement. God bless.

[@VndNvwYvvSvv]

A new deviance created by jxxdaizers as they've always done since Paul spoke against them. Would God let his most important capstone and ultimate path of salvation be misunderstood and preached wrongly for 95% of its history (1900 of 2000 years) so far only yo backslide toward the "ministry of death" again?

[@tomsmith2587]

Thank you. It's so hard to find material that isn't clearly biased in one direction of the other. You treated a tough subject fairly.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Tom!

[@OlsenMath]

I agree. I appreciate that PastorTanner gave good insight to each position and questions for each position. It was as unbiased as I have seen.

[@johnrowland9570]

I recommend BK Beale on ' A New Testament, Biblical Theology', that is if you can face 950 pages. Also an old book (1970s) is ' Children of Abraham' by David Kingdon o subject of baptism. I have never seen an attempt at refuting this book.

[@rossclark1497]

Well-put sir! Speaking from a baptistic perspective, I think you cover this well.

[@j.harris83]

The method of one’s hermeneutic will determine one’s argumentation of what the text means

[@j.harris83]

I’m also Progressive covenantal, but I also think we need to bring in more of the old an New Testament understanding of ancient symbolism into our hermeneutics

[@Maya-in-Wonderland]

Where do pentecostals fall on the spectrum? Are they more dispensational than baptists or less?

[@PastorTanner]

Usually pentecostals don’t focus on these issues as much in my experience. However, covenant theologians tend to be ‘reformed’ and reformed tend to be cessationist, so if you made me pick, I’d say dispensational. 👍

[@VndNvwYvvSvv]

How about I reject all of these instead of taking any of them on whole?

[@PastorTanner]

Fair enough. Systematics can sometimes be helpful and sometimes be wrongheaded.

[@hsh1950]

Thank you, brother. I agree with most of the comments below, in that I appreciate your gracious and informative approach. I am a 73-year-old believer who has never been to seminary, but was a teaching elder at my church for more than 30 years. That church is squarely in the traditional dispensational camp. Further, the deep dive that I have personally taken into the prophecy of Isaiah for about the past 10 years has strengthened my own position in dispensationalism. For example, how can we say that the many promises that God made to Israel, particularly in ch. 40-66 of Isaiah, are not really to literal ethnic Israel, but are to the church? If God really didn't mean what those original hearers heard, how can we, the church, believe the beautiful promises of Romans 8, for example, are to us, the church? Maybe God didn't really mean that either! John Piper (no dispensationalist!) also makes this argument, from my recollection, as he goes into Romans 9.

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you for your thoughtful remark, Stephen. Thank you also for serving God's church faithfully for so many years. God bless. -tanner

[@hsh1950]

@@PastorTanner To God be the glory!

[@gregt9085]

Even though I don’t hold your personal position, I liked the video because you gave a good big picture view of the positions. I also agree with your Hebrews 8 observation, although I think we see it differently. When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is BECOMING obsolete and GROWING old is READY TO disappear. - Hebrews 8:13 It sounds like at the time of the writing of the book of Hebrews, the Old Covenant was still in effect. This lines up with what Jesus said: For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. - Matthew 5:18

[@PastorTanner]

Very good points, Greg. I am very sympathetic to the covenant theology position. I just took a class on it and thoroughly enjoyed it. Thanks for the thoughtful ideas.

[@gregt9085]

I don’t hold to the Covenant theology position. What I do believe is that we are in a time of Covenant transition. Just as the New Covenant is not fully implemented right now, the Old Covenant is not completely obsolete YET. I think this is congruent with the concept in this verse: For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery⁠-so that you will not be wise in your own estimation⁠-that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; - Romans 11:25

[@PastorTanner]

@@gregt9085 Ah, interesting. I can see a good case to be made for that. There is an already/not-yetness to all of this and the sticky point is to figure out which aspects of the new covenant fall into which of those two categories. I tend to see more 'already' but these are in matters of degrees. I will say that I am interested in reading Gentry and Wellum's Kingdom Through Covenant very soon. I think it will help me in these regards.

[@VndNvwYvvSvv]

That's essentially the semantics of "it's not abolished, but it's fulfilled" and the answer is still yes. Fulfilled such that it is NOT in effect, and while I dont have citations handy, you can find many examples and references if you allow yourself to.

[@The300ZXGuru]

I adhere to the Westminster confession of faith because I being a presby believe in the covenant theology.

[@PastorTanner]

Yes, traditional Covenant Theology is largely a Presbyterian doctrine.

[@The300ZXGuru]

@@PastorTanner i have to be because i whole heartily believe in the eternal covenant between the father and the son. I dont believe periods of time that God decided to work in. Adam Abram Noah David and so on yeah were promises he made to his people. Therefore had a relationship with them. besides didnt Jesus out of his own mouth say that God so loved the world

[@bursebladesbits]

In discussing the topic of Hermeneutics as related to Eschatology I've frequently found Dispensationalists to be wildly inconsistent with the "literal" hermeneutic. I couldn't tell you how many times I've been chastised for "spiritualizing" the text when I point out that the author (most often the Apostle Paul) is "spiritualizing" the text. It seems to me that the Dispensational viewpoint does not define "literal" in a literal sense. How many definitions of literal are there?

[@PastorTanner]

This is actually a primary point of contention within the various groups. The definition of 'literal' is pretty murky.

[@richard-fy2mu]

Ok I am more to the left but ask is there a distinction between the eschatological aspect and the soteriological aspect of National vs Spiritual Israel. I have strongly left dispensationalism but if I make a promise to you, can I later reapply it to Larry? Each view asks questions and has weaknesses to their positions.

[@PastorTanner]

I agree, Richard. This is part of why this topic is so difficult for us to navigate as Christians. Best to hold to our positions tentatively in my opinion.

[@screwball1010]

I struggle to understand this discussion, but using your chart I think I am left of continuity.

[@donnamoll3159]

ALSO, it IS NOT WhERE DO WE FALL INTO THESE DEFINITIONS, BUT WHAT DOES THE WORD ACTUALLY SAY and we then follow that.

[@PastorTanner]

This assumes the word is exhaustively clear on all topics, which it is not.

[@faturechi]

I'm glad you are looking into this.

[@PastorTanner]

It is a really important topic and taps into Hermeneutics and Canon as well.

[@KevinKake_]

Fantastic content brother. This was very helpful and informative. Thanks

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Kevin! Appreciate the encouragement! :)

[@c.greystone9825]

As much as it’s “super enlightening” to Ps Tanner, it is “super illuminating and inspiring” for me to weigh further into my theology of these two positions. Good concise and honest opinion of Ps Tanner!

[@PastorTanner]

Great, greystone! I’m glad you were helped by the content. God bless!

[@livingtoaster1358]

For something that I think every person should think about and consider are these verses 'Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. ' 1 Peter 1:10-12 The Prophets were not writing for themselves but for us and Jesus says "Scriptures bear witness about me"

[@intothekey]

Question, what's the difference between Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology and New Covenant Theology? I go to a church that considers themselves reformed Baptist but teach New Covenant theology.

[@PastorTanner]

These are different (as you have hinted.) I cannot summarize the differences here, but Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology has been around a long time (search Nehemiah Coxe.) Here is an example: cbtseminary.org/the-federal-theology-of-nehemiah-coxe-intro/ New Covenant Theology is a relatively recent phenomena. Many Reformed Baptist Covenant Theologians of the older variety are NOT happy with New Covenant Theology or Progressive Covenentalism. This video should help you start sorting through this mess: kzbin.info/www/bejne/lYbUkIZpYq2diNE Good luck. -tanner

[@intothekey]

@@PastorTanner And here I assumed this new covenant theology I hold dear was the historical position. Doesn't mean it isn't right but I have a lot of studying to do to have a clear mind about it. I also need to talk to my elders to considering we have the Westminster confession of faith as our confession yet we're very big on typology and shadows in the old testament. I also don't think we fully reject the moral law. My brain already hurts but thank you very much for sending me down this rabbit hole.

[@PastorTanner]

@@intothekey Yes, it is a mess. As a Reformed Baptist who attends a Presbyterian Seminary, I was already confused about it. It wasn't until digging deeper that I realized that all of these other positions exist. As I mentioned in the video, a lot of these positions amount to 'baptist infighting.' FWIW I think that typology and OT shadows are a key for the future for the church. That doesn't necessarily make for a good historical case, however.

[@broal122]

What dispensation does the Bible mention

[@jeanclaudemalengret]

Great vid. Thanks. Question. Im sure you would agree that in 70AD God judged Israel and scattered them. Is it not inconsistent to say their regathering is unrelated to God's plan? If God did not regather them, then who did? Does Jesus not say "you will fall by the sword and be taken captive into all the nations UNTIL THE TIME OF THE GENTILES IS COMPLETE". Does Paul not say "Do not be ignorant of the mystery lest you take these promises for yourself, Israel has received a hardening of heart UNTIL THE TIME OF THE GENTILES IS COMPLETE".

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks. If I am reading you correctly, you are advancing a Preterist interpretation of some of these passages. However, it seems that you are sensitive to a Dispensationalist perspective regarding Israel. I think trying to ‘both/and’ this issue could definitely shed some light on the Scriptures. Thanks for sharing.

[@horsefeathersfarm7360]

The bigger question that nobody is asking: who are the people that possess the land nation of Israel? Are these real jews or are the like Jesus called in Revelation, those who call themselves Jews but are of Satan? A historical deep dive of who Jesus is referring to in Revelation 2 plays heavily into deciding where you are on this scale.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for these thoughts, I think they will be helpful for people trying to zero in on the critical issues.

[@Whatsittuya407]

Please do a refutation of mid-acts Pauline Dispensationalism. Justin Johnson is a prominent figure in this sect. Interested in your thoughts on it! Thanks!

[@Whatsittuya407]

Grace Ambassadors is his channel

[@PastorTanner]

I’ve not heard of this. I’ll have to check it out.

[@Whatsittuya407]

@@PastorTanner it’s on the fringes of orthodoxy. Goes beyond classical Dispensationalism and says the church starts in the middle of Acts soon after Paul is saved and commissioned to go to the gentiles. Been trying to talk my Father in law out of it but since there are isn’t a lot of attention around it, not much scholarship opposing it to read. I’d be interested to hear your take on it.

[@PastorTanner]

@@Whatsittuya407 interesting, I’ve never heard of such a thing. It would be interesting to come across it.

[@ShepherdMinistry]

What could I read to understand the reformed Baptist 1689 stance?

[@PastorTanner]

I think the actual confession itself is probably your best bet. That is like a summarized systematic theology. 1689 London Baptist Confession.

[@callienn]

This is a very clear and interesting video. What does Covenantal Theology do with Ezekiel 36 and Psalm 102?

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Callie. Covenant Theology tends to move in the direction of spiritualizing these texts. Ezekiel 36's New heart becomes the new birth and regeneration spoken of by Christ in John 3.

[@callienn]

@@PastorTanner Thank you for replying. I thought that must be the position. We're Messianic in Israel and we believe this to be in the process of literal fulfillment, as the people of Israel are returning to the nation of Israel, unlike other times in history where the return was predicated by repentance. A revival among the Jewish people started in the late 1960's and if you hear their testimonies, it coincided with the reunification of Jerusalem. What does Covenant Theology do with a literal Israel being formed out of the ashes of the Holocaust (per Psalm 102), after nearly 2000 years of dispersion? Is this just not of consequence or interest? (I understand that their framework spiritualizes the passages but what about when the passages look like something that has happened in history? What do they do with the history? I hope my question makes sense.)

[@PastorTanner]

@@callienn Yes, it is a good question. While some Covenant Theologians would make room for this historical development being an aspect of prophecy, many others would simply see this as coincidental. I believe I have heard covenant theologians before say something along the lines of 'the Israel that currently occupies the land isn't the same as the Israel of the Old Testament."

[@callienn]

@@PastorTanner I appreciate how you are able to speak to these differences so objectively. That's what makes this video so strong. To the second response, wow, their DNA tests and genealogies clearly prove otherwise, so that's really not a factual or truthful position to hold. Genetically the Jewish people are the people of ancient Israel. For the other position, how does an act of history at this scale, considered as a coincidence of history, fit consistently with the strong Covenantal teachings on God's sovereignty? After watching your video, I'd like do some content on what where Messianic Theology is on this spectrum, so I guess I'll need to start a youtube channel 😆. It shares likeness and differences to both Covenantal Theology (following a historical redemption narrative through the whole of scripture) and Dispensationalism (retaining the place of Israel in God's plan). One of the differences with both is that it follows God's story through the Covenants that are established in scripture, rather than an interpretive covenant system, or dividing bible history into various ages. In function I think it's actually more like Covenant Theology but the place of Israel in God's plan is always going to press the Messianic community more towards dispensationalism. Its really amazing actually, but since we only have a handful of trained Messianic Theologians, its hard to get a hold of scholarly material about this perspective.

[@PastorTanner]

@@callienn Yes, that would be a very interesting project, Callie. I will say that I am also interested in reading Wellum and Gentry's 'Kingdom Through Covenant.' I believe that it is a more organic take on the Covenant Theology idea. So much to read and so little time!

[@claytonsmith3547]

As a dispensationalist (but not in the mainstream sense), I very much enjoyed your clear and fair explanations of each position. Thank you for an excellent and well done video.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, clayton! I believe that all of the positions have something to offer. God bless!

[@mattvanderford4920]

Really I got more confused over the topic. Got reneged in the topic after Mohlers recent review. And found this video thought it might give me nuggets to pounder. I’m really not sure he did any of the positions justice. As a dispensationalist myself I would not find my self in agreement with the progressive dispys at all. His line was linear and had me further away from reformed covenant which if I could not hold to dispensationalism I’d be covenant. But not paedobastist

[@rebeccamatteson9643]

This was great! I have been wanting to have a better understanding of different theological/Biblical interpretation approaches. Like you, I find myself in the progressive covenantal camp. But it helps to understand other perspective and what underlie each. For example, dispensationalism in its various forms is an inescapable part of American Christian subculture, as it flourished as an American movement.

[@PastorTanner]

So glad that it was helpful! I appreciate your encouragement. 👍

[@dberg1964]

I noticed something in the way you chose where you stand. You said it “ resonated” with your way of thinking. Almost like it scratched an Itch inside your ear. 2 Tim. 4:3-4 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables

[@PastorTanner]

Resonance is important to help us sort out where our default proclivities lie. Once you understand the lay of the land and your own defaults, you can begin to do some deeper studies in a thoughtful way.

[@GRW2]

Great graph, but did you have to put the smart guys on the left? It seems so... backwards.

[@PastorTanner]

Hah! It was entirely arbitrary random selection.

[@dmchott]

Thank you for posting this video! It was the most straightforward and helpful presentation of the spectrum of perspectives on Covenantal and Dispensational theology I have found so far. The charts and tables help! 👍 It is encouraging to further my study! Praise the Lord for ministers, pastors and teachers of the truth of God's Word! 📖 God is faithful to help us understand all matters pertaining to life and godliness, and no matter if I struggle to understand each perspective, I trust the truth of His Word completely, and what He has revealed to me thus far. Only one position can be the correct one, and so I believe He will help me come to understand what I need to know, ultimately in His time. P.S.- also 👉 Your reference to Hebrews 8 is just what I was looking for! 👌 It's amazing how many of the those discussing these things on KZbin RARELY reference Scripture, particularly in their discussion of Dispensationalism and Eschatology. It's mostly reasoning on presuppositions, rather than expositing the Word. I know that take time, but I would prefer exposition to discussions that are over my head!

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you for the very encouraging feedback, Danielle.

[@educational4434]

Without watching this video, I'd just like to ask all of you informed people out there a question: If my understanding is that true spiritual Israel, or in other words, the true offspring or seed of Abraham, is everyone who is in Christ while simultaneously understanding that genetic Jews in the physical land of "restored in 1948 Israel" will be saved after they are surrounded by hostile Gentile nations and therefore the whole world will understand that God is their savior, including those genetic Jews, then what category of belief described in this video am I? (And please no snarky answers)

[@brojohnmcd]

This is helpful. TY

[@paulmcknight9960]

I have recently been introduced into this world of all the various theologies. I truly find that I can see each point but cannot say I agree that any are an absolute.

[@PastorTanner]

I don't think that is a bad place to be. I think all of us could use a little more humility in our theological pursuits.

[@leefury7]

Renald Showers book "There is a difference" addresses the differences as well. He's with the Lord now but he still has some lectures on YT.

[@PastorTanner]

I was not aware of him. Thanks for the heads-up.

[@dubsoldier18]

Why was this framed as “do you like- then this is for you”? Why isn’t this framed as “what does the Bible teach clearly”? How is this a dispensational view and not simply a sola scriptural view?

[@PastorTanner]

There are a couple of ways of answering this question. First and foremost is the fact that these viewpoints do not represent doctrinal positions derived exclusively from the text but rather interpretive grids that are used to interpret the text itself. As such, the answer cannot simply be derived from the question 'what does the Bible teach' but rather must be arrived at by asking 'which position most accords with the Bible's teaching and makes the most sense of a biblical worldview as I understand it?' The follow-up response results from a careful examination of the last question. We all approach the interpretive question with our own 'grid' or framework of understanding. I find it much easier to teach somebody where they are currently at ('you are here') so that they can examine the landscape from a standpoint of understanding than it is to teach somebody the entire landscape with no reference point. Think of this video as a preliminary video that can guide someone into a further and more thoughtful examination of the topic for themselves.

[@donl3634]

Pastor Tanner, it appears you've given a very fair exposition. Very informative!! Thank you for taking a reasoned look without putting forward your view in a domineering manner.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Don! God bless!

[@Rickie-x2]

Israel is the church which is the ecclesia, and this is comprised of both Jewish and former Gentile believers being born into the body of Christ as they were in the book of Acts, and in keeping the commandments as both the prophets and the apostles did. So where does this belief stand in this?

[@ReformedCitizen8939]

I was told that Dispensational theology had to only do with eschatology. Not salvation, justification, baptism, etc. 🤷‍♂️

[@PastorTanner]

This is a common understanding, Citizen. While the primary point of application for dispensationalism is indeed eschatology, it also has implications for many other areas of doctrine.

[@frankepreston7761]

Tanner, have you ever heard Michael Vlach's position on the subject of covenant theology vs Dispensational theology. And it was pretty easy to tell what position you held to when you were describing both positions. Was easy to tell the way you were describing Dispensationalism that you are more on the side of covenant theology. :)

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Frank. I do my best to be objective, but I guess no one is perfect. I have actually attended a breakout session taught by Vlach and I found him quite persuasive. I WILL say that progressive covenentalism is quite different from traditional covenant theology. You might give Wellum and Gentry's Kingdom Through Covenant a look. God bless. -tanner

[@frankepreston7761]

@PastorTanner thanks for your response I appreciate it. I've been saved for just over 7 years and the position I take is identical to Michael Vlach but I'm glad as a covenant guy you at least didn't try to persuade anyone to take your view as alot of covenant guys do. It was kinda refreshing to see someone who wasn't so dogmatic about their view being exclusively the one to take. Oh and just an FYI. It's pernounced Franky people usually see my son on my profile and between the name and profile pic, assume I am a man. Last but not least if you'd like to see my testimony you can find it under Justin peters ministries (Franke Preston's baptism)

[@PastorTanner]

@@frankepreston7761 That's great Franke, thanks for sharing. I hope to checkout your testimony when I get a chance. Take care. -tanner

[@randypacchioli2933]

After 48 years of biblical research, I still feel dispensationalism is the better view. Chafer/ Geisler/ Ryrie / Walvoord are great authors to read. Blessings to covenant theologians as well since we are all part of the body of Christ. ✝️👍❤️

[@toolegittoquit_001]

I'll stick with the Puritans 👍

[@PastorTanner]

Very nice perspectives here, Randy. We are all seeking to learn diligently.

[@PastorTanner]

@@toolegittoquit_001 Also good. :)

[@bigtobacco1098]

I'll stick with historic theology

[@mikesarahbell2633]

I'll stick with the Scriptures, as Sola Scriptura states...

[@malawidouglas6464]

You can either i/ continue to explore the bible or ii/ stop in a theological system and expand your use of long theological words.

[@PastorTanner]

I choose option 1 ! :)

[@mstorm4800]

For a thorough perspective and teaching of baptist covenant theology read "Covenant Theology from Adam to Christ" by Nehamiah Coxe. It also has John Owen's exposition of Hebrews 8:8-12. It will answer alot of the questions you posed at the end of your video

[@PastorTanner]

Very good recommendation - Thank you, Storm!

[@alanmunch5779]

Thanks, I found this interesting and helpful. Do those who say God has 'finished' with Israel also believe that God is faithful? To me, if someone says God has 'dumped', 'disowned' or 'moved on from' Israel (the Jews), that is tantamount to saying God is a liar who breaks His covenants and promises given to them, and hence might break any covenant or promise. Of course, no Christian would say that explicitly (I hope), yet their views or theology might imply that. The faithfulness of God seems to be the key issue. So, the very character of God is at stake here. One Scripture on this issue (of many) would be God's statements in Jeremiah 31:35-37. Interestingly, this immediately follows announcement of the new covenant with Israel and Judah (vv31-34) and immediately precedes a detailed description about the unusual way in which the city of Jerusalem will be built - some of which only took place in the 20th century. I find it difficult to understand how Christians today can think everything going on in (and around) the land of Israel today is coincidence or irrelevant, when remarkable things are occurring regularly in fulfilment of God's Word - to me, proving that God's Word is inspired, true and reliable, and that He is watching over His Word to fulfil it.

[@KaziahKerenRose]

Loved your explanation of each of these perspectives! Very clear and concise. However, I have to say I am even more confused as to where I fall in an "absolute" sense. I find myseIf somehow fully capable of agreeing with aspects of all of these positions. I find it impossible to only see one of these interpretations as the one and only absolute truth. If I do try to do that, I almost feel as though my understanding would be incomplete. Therefore, I don't know how to explain my view but it is probably in some non-existent reality 😅 I truly believe both Convenant and Dispensational theology and their variants exist and are true together at the same somehow with a more multi-dimensional truth 🤔🧐

[@PastorTanner]

I think this is a healthy place to be in! Continue to pray and think through the perspectives. Hold onto secondary doctrines with a ‘loose hand.’

[@matd3150]

Fantastic breakdown! Thank you

[@PastorTanner]

Glad you enjoyed! Take care.

[@rms3]

I'm a theonomist. I take the land promise seriously and I see that Gal 3:16 states that ALL of the promises given to Abraham were bestowed on Christ in particular as heir, NOT the Jews in general. From the Parable of the Wicked Husbandment, the Cursing of the Fig Tree, the broken branches, the blood curse, Romans 2:28-29, Gal 3:28 - 29, the New Testament is clear - national Israel was destroyed and Christ instituted a New Covenant with the gentile nations. Christ, as heir to all of the promises is True Israel and the church are co-heirs in Christ.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for your thoughts, rms. Very helpful to see this perspective defended.

[@rms3]

@@PastorTanner it seems the America evangelical church has nearly completely apostatized between dispensationalism, zionism and "radical two kingdoms" theology. The former cause Christians to disengage from the world in anticipation of the rapture and the latter teaches there is no reason to impose Christian standards upon the world. At this rate its all going to have to be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

[@dennisking4589]

If you want to know if the book of Revelation is linear or cyclical, decide what happens in a story when the author says "and then" before and after events....

[@PastorTanner]

Helpful idea, Dennis. Thanks.

[@stephenseebran8123]

If I may ask, has Christianity become boufet-style?

[@PastorTanner]

I suppose you are referring to the fact that I seek to indicate which position people may ‘resonate’ with. I find that a first step in changing one’s mind on an issue is to first ‘get the lay of the land’ so to speak. If you can figure out where you are naturally inclined AND understand what the available options are, then you are best poised to adjust. That’s how I see it anyway. Take care.

[@rockieroad6097]

What must I do to be saved? I don't have time to learn all this stuff. Much learning, destroys the basic man.

[@alnorman4802]

JD Frage would say "know your ABCs of Salvation", Accept Christ as your Savior, Believe in the finished work at the cross, ( Jesus death, burial and resurrection) Call upon the name of the Lord when in need. that is it,, check out the real gospel at 1 Corrinthians 15 v 1-4 no other knowledge or action needed , you are Saved and Heaven Bound

[@rockieroad6097]

What? No repentance!@@alnorman4802

[@sweynforkbeardtraindude]

Acts 2:38, it is very clear.

[@danhouseholder6784]

That was excellent, concise and well organized. Personally, it was a little surprising! For decades I have associated dispensationalism with the pretribulation rapture teaching, which I hold to be a significant error. I have seen people use a dispensational structure as a pseudo context for supporting a few end time features and events. I may not have given dispensationalism it’s self a fair shake because of this association. I am not currently studying dispensationalism, but if I do in the future, I am likely to purchase the book you referred to. I just stumbled onto your youtube channel. I am going to watch the video again later, but more closely. I was eating dinner when I watched it just now, so I did not give it my full attention. Thank you for your time!

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you so much, Dan for the kind words! God bless, and take care!

[@bluetuxtla1448]

There are post trib dispensationalists like Robert Gundry and others

[@brianschmidt704]

I am a progressive dispensationalist but hold more to a classic premillenial view. They are not connected, like many teachers seem to say. Just remember, premillenialism was the prevailing view up until Augustine.

[@bretnmannn]

@@PastorTanner PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE JEWISH TALMUD (WHICH IS THE GUIDE TO JEWISH BELIEF AND STANDS ABOVE AND INTURPRITS THE JEWISH TAHNAK OLD TESTEMENT) IT SAYS JESUS IS IN HELL, MARY IS A HARLOT THAT HAS A AFFAIR WITH A ROMAN SOLDER PANTERA JESUS REAL FATHER!, NON JEWS ARE GOYUM WHICH ARE PEOPLE OF LOWER CLASSTHAT WILL BE SURVENTS TO THE JEWS SOMEDAY! ETC. THIS DESTROYS DISPENSATIONALISM HERICIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@SpotterVideo]

Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ? (Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30) The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations? 1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants? (See Galatians 3:8) 2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ? 3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds? 4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh? 5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers? 6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"? 7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost? 8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.) 9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9) Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? 10. Watch the KZbin video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church. Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology. Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church: “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107. Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.” Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323. John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated… "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.” John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.) What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16? Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth? Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups? Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13? Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?

[@fireee5488]

1. Galatians 3:8 Paul says "nations" not "families" which matches Genesis 18:18, not Genesis 12:1-3. The differences between Genesis 12 and 18; 12- refers to the "physical promises" to the physical seed of Abraham 18- refers to the "spiritual blessings" of the Abrahamic covenant as applied to the gentile nations. 2. First sheep is obviously referring to the Jews. Second sheep refers saved gentiles who now become the "spiritual" Jews (Romans 2:28-29) to join the "commonweath of Israel" (Eph 2:12) 3. Notice the plural: Promises. Jesus Christ claims both spiritual and physical promises to Abraham. 1. JC brings salvation (spiritual) to gentiles, and 2. JC is the physical, literal, visible "King of the Jews" who will reign over the 12 tribes of Israel ("Jacob") in the Millennium 4. This is referring to a spiritual relationship. "The Child of Promise" is the real "Child of God" Promise = Jesus Christ Both Jew and Gentile, is they are "in Him" by faith, they are considered a "Child of God" 5. This one can be answered by looking at Romans 11:25-28 as well as the context, which we can get from Romans 9:3-5 If you are currently a physical Jew, yes, you are considered a "spiritual enemy" but you, as a Jew, are still beloved for the father's sake; in the words, this cut off is only temporary. Right now, yes, although some Jews are converting to Christianity, as a nation, as a whole, this conversion has not yet taken place, thus Jews are "spiritual enemies" However, in this passage, Jews are the PHYSICAL elect...(the church is the SPIRITUAL elect) We know this passage is referring to Jews when we look at the context of Romans 9:3-5 v4 "convenant" "giving of law" v5 "fathers" "flesh" etc etc... All these things are referring to the JEWS.... Romans 11 as you probably know refers to the FUTURE time period of the tribulation.... --- Okay, after question #5 I got lazy lol, but all the answers are pretty much the same thing over and over (Making the distinction between PHYSICAL vs SPIRITUAL applications).... But yeah, no, the church has not replaced israel

[@SpotterVideo]

@@fireee5488 Romans Chapter 11: In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period can be found in Matt. 10:5-7, and Acts 10:36-38, and Gal. 1:14-18. Many try to claim God never gave the Jews a chance to accept Christ, so there must be some Plan B of salvation before or during the Second Coming of Christ. Romans 1:16 proves they are wrong, since Paul said the Gospel went "first" to the Jews. Many ignore the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", and as "men of Israel", and as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. The Gentiles were not grafted in until several years later. This passage proves Paul was right about the Gospel being taken "first" to the Jews. Paul reveals two different groups of Israelites in Romans 9:6-8. There is an Israel of the promise, and an Israel of the flesh. This is part of the context of Romans 11. Paul speaks about the "remnant" of Israel in Romans 9:27. This is also part of the context of Romans 11. Paul starts Romans 11 with two different groups of Israelites. In verse one Paul reveals he is still an Israelite, even after his conversion. Then Paul refers to two different groups of Israelites during the time of Elijah. There were the Baal worshippers, and there was the faithful "remnant". In verse five Paul says there is also a faithful "remnant" of Israelites during his time. This must be the Israelites who have accepted Christ, as on the Day of Pentecost. Paul uses the two olive trees as a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of believing Israelites, and believing Gentiles grafted together into the same tree. The unbelieving Israelites have been broken off but can be grafted back in through faith in Christ in verses 23-24. Verse 26 is the problem for many modern Christians. What does the verse actually say, and how is it changed by many in the modern Church. I have heard two of our nations famous preachers say the following. "And then all Israel will be saved..." I have heard another say the following. "And all Israel will be saved..." What does God's Word, recorded by the Apostle Paul actually say? Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: The English word "so" is translated from the Greek word "houto", which is an adverb of manner, instead of an adverb of timing. Some have changed the word from "so" to "then", in order to change the meaning of the verse. How will all of the "remnant" of Israel from Romans 9:27 be saved? The answer is found in the verses that precede verse 26 and are found below. Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Paul quoted from the OT in referring to the Deliverer coming out of Sion to pay for sin. Did this happen at Calvary, or will Jesus die again for His people in the future? Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Verse 28 can only be understood by looking at how Paul started the passage. He started with two different groups of Israelites and he ends the passage in the same way. There are two different groups of "they" in verse 28. One group of "they" reject Christ and are the enemies of God, and another group of "they" are the election which accept Christ through hearing the Gospel and faith. Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. Based on Luke 21:24b-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fullness at the Second Coming of Christ. This agrees with what Paul said in Romans 1:16 about the Gospel going “first” to the Jews.

[@fireee5488]

​@@SpotterVideo If you want to grow out a dark beard and run off into the mountains of Judea and pretend like you're a Jewish virgin chosen from the Tribe of Benjamin who gets beheaded by the antichrist while raising the dead and healing the sick, you can be my guest..... (or you can rightly divide and say that doesn't apply to Church Age Christians....) The Acts of the Apostles is a transitional book (during a transitional time period) that messes everyone up. The Jews (as a nation) rejected God three times: -They rejected the (Father) during the Old testament, which resulted in 400 years of silence after Malachi. -They rejected the (Son) Christ in the New testament, and that resulted in the cross and empty tomb -In Acts, God gives the Jews one last time to accept Him through the (Holy Spirit), but again, they end up stoning Stephen (Acts 7)… Therefore in Acts 8 and on, we start seeing the transition taking place from Peter (JEWS) to Paul (GENTILES), from Jew to Gentile (and yes, this transition is slow and gradual, not an immediate cut off)…. And yes, some individual Jews did receive Christ. As a matter of fact, as you’ve mentioned, thousands of Jews have been saved since Acts 3 (Acts 21:20)... However, Peter in Acts 3 is, again, preaching a message of NATIONAL REPENTANCE AND CONVERSION, and the Lord’s “blotting out” of the NATION’S SINS won’t take place until the Second Advent (Heb 8:8-12, Zech 8:8; Isa 54:13-14, 59:20, 60:21; Jer 31:31-34; Hos 2:23; Rom 11:25-27; Deut 30:6, Joel 3:20-21).... In other words, those “times” never came for “THE NATION OF ISRAEL”…

[@SpotterVideo]

@@fireee5488 What does an understanding of the New Covenant do to the Pretrib Rapture doctrine? Since the New Covenant is “everlasting” in Hebrews 13:20, how is the New Covenant Church age going to end seven years before the Second Coming of Christ? Why would anyone think God is going back to the Old Covenant system now made “obsolete” by the New Covenant in Hebrews 8:13? We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24. Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it. The Capitol "C" Church, as we use the word today, is not found in the entire Book of Revelation. Individual church bodies in ancient Asia Minor are found. In Revelation 12:11 we find those under the blood of the Lamb. A person cannot be under the blood of the Lamb and not be a part of the New Covenant Church of Jesus Christ. Verse 12 of this passage proves at least part of the tribulation period is the wrath of Satan upon the people of God. Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. "It may come as a surprise to most pre-Trib prophecy students that the post-Trib position (in its primitive form) is the oldest point of view." (The quotation above is from the book "Will You Escape The Tribulation? RAPTURE [Under Attack]", by Tim LaHaye, copyright 1998, Page 197.) Tim LaHaye was co-author of the “Left Behind” books and movies which have convinced millions of modern Christians that the Church age ends seven years before the Second Coming of Christ. Recently, Pastor Matt Furse of Mountain View Baptist Church in Custer, S.D. has written a book titled “Which One Is Right?’, which reveals the recent history of the pretrib rapture doctrine, and the fact it does not agree with what is written in the King James Bible. The gathering of the Church is described at the end of 1 Thess. Chapter 4, and the timing of the event is found in chapter 5. The word “But” in the first verse of chapter 5 connects the two chapters, and the words “we” and “sleep” in verse 10 of chapter 5 prove the two chapters are connected. The Greek words for “wrath” and “tribulation” are not the same word, as proven by the verse below. Rev 1:9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. Watch the KZbin video “Pretribulation Paradox” by former pretrib believer skydiver626.

[@fireee5488]

@@SpotterVideo since the church is under the new convenant, the church, again as a GROUP or WHOLE, doesnt go through tribulation, run off into the mountains, get their heads chopped off etc since Jesus already took the WRATH on the cross for all (including those individuals JEWS that believe in Jesus).... There are replacement theologists out there that think Christians will have to go through tribulation but that doesn't make sense doctrinally since the tribulation, again, is for the NATION of Israel (who REJECTED the cross) for the FUTURE tribulation. (Again, the Church has NOT replaced them....) A Christian, as we know, CANNOT go to Hell, therefore they can't even entertain the possibility of taking the mark of the beast (and taking MOB = HELL) since Christians will be raptured away by then, as we are not appointed to wrath (1 Thess 5:9), the JEWS as a NATION are appointed to WRATH, since they rejected Jesus. It would be completely pointless for a Christian to go through wrath. Pretrib rapture theology is absolutely, 100% connected to all this. End times theology ties everything together; in actuality, as it is where the PROMISES of the PHYSICAL KINGDOM to the PHYSICAL seed of ISRAEL will be fulfilled (+As well as the Spiritual seed via NEW JERUSALEM)....Again, taking place in the FUTURE.....!!!!!! Gods Word cannot contradict itself and with replacement theology, contradictions are everywhere, especially with end times theology

[@sharamadsen3080]

Covenant theologians read the text literate-ly; that is, we read literally unless the genre is poetic/apocalyptic/symbolic, etc.

[@PastorTanner]

Nice summary statement, Shara.

[@clayman2216]

My question on baptism is: If it’s the “baptism of repentance” then how would it apply to infants? Note: I see Jesus “repenting” (God is noted in the Old Testament for repenting from judgment, not sin) from his earthly family and going into his full ministry after his baptism. From there he refers to his earthly mother, Mary, as “woman” not mother.

[@PastorTanner]

@@clayman2216 Interesting question! The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is that they might say the baptism of repentance is John's baptism, whereas Christian baptism is different. Not sure if they would respond this way or not. Thanks for sharing.

[@yohanesliong4818]

This is so informative. Thank you!

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you for the positive feedback! :)

[@edeancozzens3833]

Almost everyone missed that Romans 2 deals with Jews while Romans 9-11 is about the House of Israel and the two are not the same. Dah.

[@PastorTanner]

Very interesting take, E Dean. Thanks for sharing.

[@brianschmidt704]

I appreciate your even handed approach to a very difficult topic. I land towards the middle of this spectrum but lean towards dispensation lism, Because the text itself needs to interpret itself. Augustine is the one who started us on the idea of spiritualizing the text, and that always leads to trouble. God's word should speak for itself. But traditional dispensationalism Leads to many problems especially when it comes to the end times. All I can tell the viewers is to study for themselves. And do not just depend on what your pastor tells you.

[@PastorTanner]

Quite a reasonable approach, Brian. Thanks for sharing.

[@jamesblakeman]

Joshua 21:43-45 YWH fulfilled His promises regarding the land. It was contingent on their obedience as evidenced by the the Babylonian Captivity. They rejected the Messiah which puts them in a state of disobedience today. Therefore, they have no legitimate claim to the modern state of Iz based on the scriptures.

[@leebarry5181]

As far as "spiritualizing" the Old Testament promises, take a look at how the New Testament writers interpret the OT scriptures and see if they interpret them "historically" or "spiritually." Examples Acts 2:16-39, Hebrews 4 (especially 4:3).

[@PastorTanner]

Yes, Scripture interpreting scripture is generally a good rule of thumb. 👍

[@R9500pro1]

Excellent breakdown, Tanner. Well done! I found myself bouncing from one side of your chart to the other, never finding a solid spot. I affirm Biblical Theology over Systematic, but I'm confident God is not done with Israel. I better get back to my studies.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for the encouragement - God bless you in your studies!

[@davethinkingsystems]

Great video as usual. I did a search and I've got this book as a sleeper :-) Going to have a read. Thanks

[@PastorTanner]

Fantastic! I enjoyed it very much. Enjoy!

[@dswartze]

Based on the chart you used on the Israel/Church Relationship - I am a Dispensationalist. I keep coming back to the fact that my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is Jewish and that according to Romans 11:11-24 God is NOT done with Israel: 1) "Have they (Israel) stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not!" 2) v17 ... "Some of the branches were broken off and you being a wild olive tree were grafted in among them". 3) For Romans 9:6b, "For they are not all Israel who are of Israel". Jews (Israel) aren't saved because they are Jewish (just like not all Americans are Christians; not all people who go to church are saved). Before the Cross, Jews are saved only when they believe in the Promises of God (OT) (Abraham). And after the Cross, that Jesus Christ is their Messiah (NT). NOT trying to convince anyone to agree with me ... just a quick synopsis of why I am a Dispensationalist. @PastorTanner ... you did an excellent job as always! Keep these videos coming! I believe one of the problems with the modern Church is that most people do not know what they believe. Ask most "Christians" what the Gospel is, and they can't tell you what the Bible says (it doesn't matter what anything else says it is!). They give some incoherent explanation. For something as important as ones Eternal future and knowing who the Bible says Jesus Christ is - you'd like to think "Christians" would know at least these two things!!!

[@PastorTanner]

Well thought out ideas and response here. Thanks, Darren. God bless!

[@BishopEddie5443]

God's earthly kingdom program has been shut down in the dispensation of grace. We are in the 'mystery' program. There has been a divine interruption in the prophetic program and anything going on in Israel is not significant. The resumption of the earthly kingdom program begins AFTER the Rapture. Gentiles will never be 'grafted in' the grafted in ones are unbelieving Jews, grafted in with believing Jews. The Ashkenazi people are not descendants of Shem, they are descendants of Japheth. Revelation 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Revelation 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

[@jeffsaunders4812]

If God is done with the Kingdom of Israel why when the disciples asked Jesus in Acts 1:6-7 , “Lord, are you restoring the Kingdom of Israel at this time? He said to them “ It’s is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has set by his own authority “ if the Kingdom of Israel was done why would Jesus not say no Gods not going to restore Israel that was the previous covenant? Also if God is done with Israel why is throne called David’s throne? Why is our future home called the New Jerusalem? This is why I don’t think God is done with Israel.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for sharing some thoughts on this subject, Jeff.

[@puglover8171]

Everyone is a dispensationalist and a covenant believer . The old and new testaments are two different dispensations and old and new testaments(covenants)

[@PastorTanner]

Good thoughts here, Pug. Thanks!

[@thesaviorofALL]

This video is amazing thnks tanner im definitely gonna order that book and save this video 🙏🙏❤️❤️

[@PastorTanner]

Enjoy! God bless.

[@thesaviorofALL]

@@PastorTanner blessing to you as well I. Jesus name 🙏

[@bradwhitt6768]

Covenant theology hinges on the Greek word καί. Which if you interpret it the way covenant theology replacement theology or reformed theology you get a completely different meaning of Israel which would make the Old Testament completely wrong.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for your thoughts, Brad. Is there a specific verse where this kai translation makes the biggest difference?

[@bradwhitt6768]

@@PastorTanner Galatians 6:16 look up the video “did God replace Israel” Dr David Mishkin. The word determines what Paul means by the Israel of God.

[@bradwhitt6768]

@@matthewsouthwell3500 you're right it's multiple verses that if you believe in fulfillment/replacement theology makes all the Old Testament make 0 sense. You have to allagorize almost all prophecy and a good chunk of the Old Testament.

[@guilleagudelo777]

What a great, neutral, fair minded video. You got yourself a new subscriber

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you! God bless. ❤️

[@newlightforgod]

This was really good!

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Gabriel! God bless. :)

[@jakemcfadden7405]

Applying for a youth pastor job and they asked in their questioniare, "Would you consider yourself dispensational in your approach to the Scriptures..." This video may have got me a job!! LOL Seriously though, fantastic handling of the issue. Thank you so much for posting

[@PastorTanner]

Awesome, Jake! Thanks for the feedback, and I hope you get the job! God bless. :)

[@hettinga359]

I also would highly recommend the 4-views book. Clarified a lot of things for me. Snoeberger (the guy who represents the Trad Disp position) is my ST professor. Great man! Though I don’t agree with him on everything I think he represents Dispensationalism well.

[@PastorTanner]

Awesome! Thanks for the recommendation.

[@morganfrmn]

You know Irenaeus was the first Dispensationalist. Against Heresies book 4, chapter 36. And many other chapters

[@bigtobacco1098]

No... he was a premillenniliast, but not in the dispensational sense... he held to 4 COVENANTS, not dispensations

[@morganfrmn]

@@bigtobacco1098 Dispensationalist believe the covenants. In fact a different covenant occurs in each dispensation. Especially if you are a covenant theologian. Covenant theology is proven false not because of the basic principles of covenant theology but because of all the additional stuff added onto like infant baptism. Gay marriage, Calvinism and the list goes on. Thus 10% truths and 90% heracy. But the covenants are absolutely true.

[@bigtobacco1098]

@@morganfrmn ummm... no gay marriage... bad form... I can list numerous examples of gay dispensational folks

[@bigtobacco1098]

@@morganfrmn the church has ALWAYS practiced paedobaptism, or, OIKOS covenant theology

[@bigtobacco1098]

@@morganfrmn calvinism is newer

[@markanthony3275]

And once again God reminded me that He made an eternal covenant with His people Israel. This time, God reminded me as I read the birth accounts of John the Baptist and Jesus in Luke where Zechariah, John's father, while filled with the Holy Spirit , made this declaration... " To show mercy to our fathers and to REMEMBER HIS HOLY COVENANT, the OATH He swore to our father Abraham..." Luke 1:72-73 . What covenant would that be? " On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abraham and said, " To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates..." Genesis 15:18. No one can deny that that part of Dispensationalism is TRUE....and that Covenantalism has it wrong, ...Israel is not the Church.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for sharing your perspective, Mark. I appreciate it. 👍

[@shopnote7003]

Very fair and open minded review. And accurate. Covenant theology is definitely a “system” of theology while the dispensational position takes the Bible literally for what it says. God only made covenants with Israel. Gentiles were NEVER under any covenants.

[@tomthumb3762]

"Do you believe strongly in an original literalist hermeneutic? Do you believe that we should take the scriptures how they read at face value, and just read them as literally as possible then dispensationalism is probably right for you. There's a very strong focus on authorial intent when it comes to dispensationalism, and that comes through very, very strongly." That is the only way to read the Bible.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks, Tom. Sounds like dispensationalism is right for you. 👍

[@honahwikeepa2115]

Excellent video 🙏👍

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you 👍

[@ceedeechester2277]

"The Fatal Flaw of the theology behind infant baptism" by Jeffery D. Johnson. A good place to start investigating Reformed Baptist Covenant theology.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for the recommendation, Ceedee.

[@meganbeebe9740]

Great presentation; All that you speak of is very important; I didn’t know about either Covenant Theology or Dispensationalism; Over the last decade I have spent much time studying Scripture from beginning to end and have landed pretty solidly in the dispensationalist camp; I came upon a very interesting study that will take me a long time but, is well worth the effort: Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism: An Inductive Mediate Theology of Salvation Book by C. Gordon Olson

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for your thoughts, Megan. I was not aware of this resource, I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.

[@bop-ya-good]

Who here can claim with me they are DEAD to the law? Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. In this the dispensation of Grace... Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. We are dead to the law, not led by the law, redeemed from the laws curse, and have no need of a schoolmaster of the law. Big Amen anyone?

[@brucegraystaff7428]

Well done Brother.

[@PastorTanner]

Thank you! Much love.

[@cameronspach220]

I probably err on the side of a literal reading of Jeremiah 31, in which the NC is cut with the Jewish ppl.

[@PastorTanner]

Gotcha. Thanks for your clear stance, Cameron.

[@kittagp]

Very elucidative. I'm not sure where I stand, pastor, but when I think of what the people of God went through in Exodus ( the red sea, the water, etc) I think that their eyes will still open for God one day. The LORD promissed a great deal of Land that wasn't acquired, much the opposite, the enemies took their land. I believe Israel (and here I'm giving value to the Earth Israel because God always amazes us in a Time that is not ours and takes forever for us, but He knows what He does.

[@kittagp]

Actually, when I think about what the Bible says on tribulation (that it is going to be the period of most suffering that there ever was), I stick with the idea that the LORD from the beginning of Israel had minimizying their suffering in His heart...since they are/will be in the center of the turmoil talking about a period that has not started yet, but that He addressed from the very beginning.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for your thoughts. This perspective is more in line with the dispensational approach.

[@hughesda1006]

Awesome video. Thank you! +1 Sub. 😀

[@PastorTanner]

Awesome, thank you!

[@KevinCease]

Hi I am a new Christian, only been 6 months but the hours I’ve been pouring in are more than a full time job. What I have learned is every Christian I’ve met has a different angle and they all believe they are right. Well this was news to me. I’ve been trying to not become a part of the division but at the same time categorize each view. Now I stumbled into this subject and I now see this is what I’m craving to dive in to and better understand and it will greatly help me not only take my own place in these categories but place others views in their appropriate place on the spectrum. Thanks!

[@PastorTanner]

No problem, Kevin! This is a worthy endeavor! Keep up the effort. I’ll pray for you.

[@lisanmc4536]

You should look at Orthodox and Roman Catholic Bible teaching so you have actual interpretation that has been passed down through tradition. The Lord did not leave us a Bible but rather oral traditions/teachings which the RC church & Orthodox churches have safeguarded. The Douay-Rheims Bible with commentary would be a great guide to you.

[@PastorTanner]

@@lisanmc4536 I appreciate your comment, lisanmc. I find both traditional and contemporary interpretations to be helpful.

[@VndNvwYvvSvv]

Probably the 2 greatest pitfalls to avoid are: 1. Laws of man, which Pharisees used (t41mud) and which many churches now hold like the Catholic catechism. 2. J-izing (this platform won't even let me type the word, lol) which was a major part of what Paul wrote against, trying to drag things back to the "old law", that Christians should conform to J tradition.

[@Saratogan]

Is there danger in interpreting scripture in a generally literal way? After all, we read most literature in a literal way unless the metaphorical or typical is relatively obvious in the intent of the author. Why should we read the Bible differently? Also, is it not safer to interpret in a literal sense? You would not read your car manual in anything other than a literal sense. To read it otherwise would be very dangerous indeed. Here is another thought. OT books like Zechariah become meaningless unless read literally. In covenant theology, 10 men will never take hold of the coat of a Jew and say let us go up to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of tabernacles because we know that the Lord is with you. So, why did YHWH give this specific prophecy to Zechariah? Why did He give him the whole prophecy? I will tell you why I am a dispensationalist. It is because of the feasts of YHWH. They are dispensational. Israel's timeline begins with the passover and ends with the feast of tabernacles. Until I see those 10 gentiles attached to one who is of national Israel headed to Jerusalem for the feast of tabernacles in the millennial kingdom, I know that God is not finished with Israel.

[@PastorTanner]

Thanks for your very thoughtful response, Robert. I confess I have not studied the feasts to the depth I would desire. I suspect they would give me some good thinking. Thanks. 👍

[@Saratogan]

@@PastorTanner I grew up in the Plymouth Brethren and the Bible studies were deep and intense (not just eschatology). The OT is reviewed constantly and intently. Also, as you probably already know, the feasts are very prominent in John's gospel where they take on the moniker of "the feasts of the Jews". I get the sense that John is telling us something when he talks of the feasts in that objective manner. It would an argument from silence or at best inference but I think that he is telling us something about the gifts and calling of God being irrevocable. Thank you for your feedback as well. May the Lord bless you as you await along with me the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

[@PastorTanner]

@@Saratogan Very cool background. Thanks for sharing.

[@PopHowden]

Must say I enjoy a literal approach to Scripture (right side) but tend to lean towards the Covenantal Theological position (left side). For me there is a plan for Israel (right side) but the distinction within the body of Christ seems artificial (left side) and should be viewed in terms of God's focus. The Unity of all of scripture is also satisfying (left side). I find myself not fitting well into these positions. Enjoyed your presentation.

[@PastorTanner]

Very nice, Pop. This kind of description is usually applicable to someone who thinks for themselves. I appreciate that. 👍

[@Totem360]

I appreciate your work and excellent presentation. Thank you! It seems to me this continuum of thought could be attributed to Greek minds attempting to fully understand the mind of God. I'm not sure if that's a profitable adventure for man's intellect or new life in Christ. Godspeed and continued blessings in your life.

[@PastorTanner]

I like this comment a lot, Totem. I appreciate very much Iain Mcgilchrist's work on hemispheric lateralization in the brain. Your phrase 'Greek minds' maps roughly onto his 'left hemisphere' and I think your comment is spot on. We are limited and finite creatures and ought to embrace a certain level of humility.

[@ken440]

yes it seemed like greek to me too.😮

[@PastorTanner]

@@ken440 Hopefully this helped a little! God bless.