The New Testament (Covenant) – How It Fulfilled the Old Testament
December 23, 2024
A Different Fulfillment Theology
by Dennis Christian
Fall 2023
Abstract
When Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, came and established the New Testament (Covenant), did that replace the religion of the Jews, referred to today as Judaism? Or, did it fulfill or complete the Jew’s religion? Among Christian theologians there are several possible theologies regarding Biblical revelation. In this article I will mention the three primary ones: Covenant Theology, Dispensationalism, and Replacement Theology (AKA Fulfillment Theology) and offer a fourth alternative termed A Different Fulfillment Theology. I will then explore what God’s intention for Israel was and what would be different if they had followed it.
Covenant Theology
Covenant theology is a framework for biblical interpretation, informed by exegetical, biblical, and systematic theology, that recognizes that the redemptive history revealed in Scripture is explicitly articulated through a succession of covenants (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and New), thus providing an organizing principle for biblical theology.
Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism is a theological framework for interpreting the Bible which maintains that history is divided into multiple ages called “dispensations” in which God interacts with his chosen people in different ways.
Replacement Theology (AKA Fulfillment Theology)
Replacement theology, also called Supersessionism, is the Christian doctrine that the Christian Church has superseded the Jewish people, assuming their role as God’s covenanted people, thus asserting that the New Covenant through Jesus Christ has superseded or replaced the Mosaic covenant.
A Different Fulfillment Theology
A Different Fulfillment Theology is a theological framework for biblical interpretation similar to Replacement Theology, but, rather than replacing the Mosaic covenant, it is the fulfillment of the Mosaic covenant. It is similar to Covenant Theology in that it is the fulfillment of all other Old Testament covenants. As N. T. Wright asserts [1], the Apostle Paul did not view his conversion to Christianity as a new religion or faith but as recognizing Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah of his existing Jewish faith. Christianity was not a new faith; it was the continuance of his existing faith in Jehovah God and His promised Messiah who had now come. To Paul, it was God’s true, continuous encounter with mankind – from Genesis through the coming of His Messiah. Jesus was not a new deity; He was the One known form the beginning. He was God Himself come to earth. “He who hath seen Me hath seen the Father!” and “I and My Father are One!” and “I am the I Am!” Though we have termed followers of Jesus as Christians and the faith itself as Christianity, in God’s sight we are God-followers in all of His manifestations – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
How is this a different fulfillment theology? In this theology, God has not abandoned Israel, He has continued His relationship with them through their Messiah. Yes, their religious practices were now changed, but their God had not. The Law had held them in custody, but now their Messiah had come and the Law’s role had been fulfilled. They need but follow the new guidance of the Messiah having believed in Him. But the majority rejected Jesus as their Messiah and got stuck in the Mosaic Law and culture. God did not abandon them, they abandoned God. The true religion of God continued on with those who believed in God the Son both Jew and Gentile. These were/are the Israel of God, the children of the promise.
In today’s nation of Israel, the Israel of God are those living there who have accepted Jesus as their Messiah. The other Israelis are not included in the Israel of God.
God’s Intention and What If
What did God intend for His chosen people Israel once their Messiah had come? Did He intend for them not to accept Jesus as their Messiah? No! Why would He? Yes, He foresaw it – Jesus the stumbling block, the rock of offense, but just because He foresaw it does not mean He wanted it. This is what N. T. Wright was getting at when he said Paul saw belief in Christ a continuance of his Jewish faith in Jehovah.
If God had chosen Israel’s response to Jesus, their Messiah, I believe He would have had the Jewish leaders and their nation accept Jesus as their Messiah, either based on Jesus’ teachings and miracles, or based on His resurrection. If the former, then God would providentially have arranged another way for Jesus to have been crucified, perhaps incited by a minority Jewish faction or the Romans directly. If the latter, it was the resurrection that convinced them He was the authentic Messiah.
So, what if the Jewish leaders and nation had accepted Jesus as their Messiah? How would that affect Christianity? Scripture? Jewish culture? History? For Christianity, the name itself may never have materialized. Christ was the fulfillment of belief in the Jehovah God of Israel. Perhaps our name would have been Jehovahism – belief in Jehovah God and His Messiah Son, Jesus – the Savior of mankind through the cross and salvation by grace through repentance and faith.
Scripture would be affected. The obvious parts would be where reference to the Jews’ rejection of their Messiah was addressed, as in Romans 9-11. The OT prophesies of the Jews’ rejection would also be changed.
How would Jewish culture be different. No doubt, Paul would have been seen by Jewish leaders as one of their chief leaders, and his scriptures covering the change from being under the Law to being under grace would have been believed. The Jewish nation would have been freed from the Law of Moses including all the additions that added up to over 600 laws. They would have accepted Jesus’ standards for living – love God and neighbor and the Golden Rule, and the standards laid out in Peter’s, John’s, and Paul’s letters. The Jews, like Gentiles, would have replaced the Passover observance completely or subordinated it to the observance of the Lord’s Supper.
History would have been different, much better for the Jews and the relationship between the Jews and Gentiles. That’s because Jews and Gentiles would have shared the same faith – belief in Jehovah God and Jesus His Messiah. Gentile Christians would not have persecuted the Jews for their unbelief and for crucifying Christ. As Paul said, Jews and Gentiles would have been one in Christ.
There really is just one true faith
Belief in Jehovah God and His Messiah – God the Son – who takes away the sin of the world. It’s what the followers of Jesus believe today and what the proponents of Judaism should have embraced. They followed God until Jesus came, then abandoned His will for them.
[1] N. T. Wright, A Biography of Paul, pages 53-54
📈 You got a transaction from our company. Confirm > https://telegra.ph/Ticket--6974-01-15?hs=2c8b40c861101779af863f5749fa1916& 📈 says:
jir93m