Archive
Amillennialism’s Two-Edged Sword
Amillennialism’s typology of Israel is a sharp, two-edged sword. Paedobaptists use it to cut down Dispensationalism’s claims about the land of Canaan, but the same sword equally cuts down their claims about offspring.
This post provides a helpful summary of Kline’s arguments against Dispensationalism (see this PDF for more context). 1689 Federalism agrees with all of them but swings the sword back around.
Dispensationalism is condemned by the inconsistency of its hermeneutics. The people and the land aspects of the kingdom are in fact correlative and not to be wrenched apart. Together they represent the twin cultural task of filling the earth with people and subduing the kingdom realm as that creational program gets taken up into redemptive history. Land and people promises must therefore be kept together within each level, whether in the typological embodiment of the cultural program in the old covenant kingdom or in its new covenant version. A hybrid combination of old cove nant land and new covenant people violates the conceptual unity of these two cultural components of the kingdom, while at the same time ignoring the discreteness of the typical and antitypical kingdoms. In addition to the hermeneutical inconsistency of this form of Dispens ationalism there is also the problem that it too contradicts the Bible’ s insistence that in Christ the distinction between Jew and Gentile ceas es with respect to kingdom inheritance.
To which we respond:
Amillennial paedobaptism is condemned by the inconsistency of its hermeneutics. The people and the land aspects of the kingdom are in fact correlative and not to be wrenched apart. Together they represent the twin cultural task of filling the earth with people and subduing the kingdom realm as that creational program gets taken up into redemptive history. Land and people promises must therefore be kept together within each level, whether in the typological embodiment of the cultural program in the old covenant kingdom or in its new covenant version. A hybrid combination of old covenant people and new covenant land violates the conceptual unity of these two cultural components of the kingdom, while at the same time ignoring the discreteness of the typical and antitypical kingdoms. In addition to the hermeneutical inconsistency of this form of paedobaptism there is also the problem that it too contradicts the Bible’s insistence that in Christ the privilege of offspring according to the flesh ceases with respect to kingdom inheritance.
And when Kline says
Covenantal hermeneutics properly perceives the prototypal, provisional, passing nature of the first level kingdom and the antitypal, perfective, permanent nature of the second level kingdom. Dispensationalists, failing to see that the first level kingdom becomes obsolete and gets replaced by the antitype in the messianic age, continue the obsolete order on indefinitely into the new age… Dispensationalism radically misconstrues the typological structure of the old and new covenants… obscuring the historical promise- fulfillment relationship of these two covenants.
Dispensationalism’s virtual rejection of the typological identity of the first level kingdom finds expression in their literalistic misinterpretation of prophecies that depict the second level kingdom in the typological idiom of the first level model.
We say
Covenantal hermeneutics properly perceives the prototypal, provisional, passing nature of the first level kingdom and the antitypal, perfective, permanent nature of the second level kingdom. Paedobaptists, failing to see that the first level kingdom becomes obsolete and gets replaced by the antitype in the messianic age, continue the obsolete order on into the new age… Paedobaptism radically misconstrues the typological structure of the old and new covenants… obscuring the historical promise- fulfillment relationship of these two covenants.
Paedobaptism’s virtual rejection of the typological identity of the first level kingdom finds expression in their literalistic misinterpretation of prophecies that depict the second level kingdom in the typological idiom of the first level model.
Likewise, when Kim Riddlebarger says
[T]he problem with that is, when you’re using a Christ-centered hermeneutic, you don’t start with Genesis 12 and look at the promise God made to Abraham and then insist that that reading of the promise overrides everything that comes subsequent to that. So for example the land promise in Genesis 12 – and it’s repeated throughout 15, 18, 22, on and on and on – when that land promise is repeated, dispenationalists say “See, that must mean Israel means Israel and that God is going to save Israel again to fulfill the land promise at the end of the age.” Whereas I would look at that and say, “How do Jesus and the Apostles look at the land promise? How do Jesus and the Apostles look at the Abrahamic Covenant?” And that is at the heart of this entire debate.
We respond:
[T]he problem with paedobaptism is, when you’re using a Christ-centered hermeneutic, you don’t start with Genesis 17 and look at the promise God made to Abraham and then insist that that reading of the promise overrides everything that comes subsequent to that. So for example the offspring promise in Genesis 17 – and it’s repeated throughout 12, 15, 22, on and on and on – when that offspring promise is repeated, paedobaptists say “See, that must mean offspring means offspring and that God included physical offspring in the church and never took them out.” Whereas I would look at that and say, “How do Jesus and the Apostles look at the offspring promise? How do Jesus and the Apostles look at the Abrahamic Covenant?” And that is at the heart of this entire debate.
And when R. Scott Clark argues
My baptist friends are convinced that the inclusion of children into the visible covenant community by a sacrament was typological and therefore not part of the New Covenant. We can test that theory, however, in Scripture. Ask yourself this question: The prophets told us that the sacrifices and circumcision were typological and temporary, but where do they tell us that the inclusion of children into the visible covenant community is also temporary and typological like circumcision, like the sacrifices. We can’t just assume that is the case. We have to actually show that is the case. What does Scripture actually say about children, particularly from the point of view of typologies looking forward?… Isaiah ‘I will bring your seed from the east and from the west. I will gather you.’… Is. 44:3 he restates the promise. ‘For I will pour water on the thirsty land and streams on the dry ground.’ What does he mean? Well, he explains in the next clause. ‘I will pour my Spirit upon’ whom? ‘your children. And my blessing upon your descendants.’ This is the same sort of imagery that you see in the prophet Joel’s restatement. But you have to see how fundamentally Abrahamic that language is. (Heidelcast 113, 3:55)
We let Lee Irons and Kline respond:
Covenantal hermeneutics properly perceives the prototypal, provisional, passing nature of the first level kingdom and the antitypal, perfective, permanent nature of the second level kingdom. Dispensationalists, failing to see that the first level kingdom becomes obsolete and gets replaced by the antitype in the messianic age, continue the obsolete order on indefinitely into the new age… Dispensationalism’s virtual rejection of the typological identity of the first level kingdom finds expression in their literalistic misinterpretation of prophecies that depict the second level kingdom in the typological idiom of the first level model.
Notice Kline’s reference to what he calls “typological idiom.” Typological idiom occurs when the prophets depict the second-level kingdom using language taken from the first-level kingdom. One of the major errors of dispensationalism [and Clark] is that it fails to grasp the type-antitype relationship between the two levels, and thus it interprets the language of the prophetic literature literally. Covenant theology, by contrast, recognizes that the first-level language is prophetic or typological idiom, so that when we come to the second-level fulfillment in Christ, we are not surprised to find first-level language fulfilled in surprising ways.
See also
Objection to Israel as a type of the Church
On my post about Riddlebarger’s double-edged sword, I mentioned in passing that Israel was a type of the church. Someone named Joshua took objection to that, arguing that I had taken typology “too far.”
Now, I greatly appreciate that Joshua took the time to read my post and took the time to comment. That is the reason that I post my thoughts on a public blog. I’m not writing on here because I have everything figured out. I’m writing on here because a) it helps me organize my thoughts, and b) it allows for me to be sharpened by iron. So I appreciate Joshua’s comments, and I hope more people continue to comment on things they object to (or maybe even agree with!).
Joshua then made a post over at his own blog:
I’ve been commenting on a blog post as to whether or not the church is the antitype to Israel. I think one runs into an issue when looking at Israel as the type and the church as the antitype because it distracts people from the fact that Jesus is the true Israel. One of my favorite authors is Dr. Kim Riddlebarger who wrote the book A Case for Amillennialism. He also wrote an excellent blog post entitled, “Amillennialism 101 — Jesus Christ: The True Israel“, which explains the position so well.
http://foedustheologus.com/reformed-theology/jesus_the_true_israel.html
This is a very interesting comment, because it undermines his earlier objections in my comment thread. Let me explain: My comment was in opposition to classic paedobaptist covenant theology which argues that the nation of Israel is the church of the OT. It is the same body as the church in the NT. This is Joshua’s position (correct me if I’m wrong Joshua).
P1. The nation of Israel was the church in the OT
P2. The NT church is the church in the NT
C: The nation of Israel and the NT church are essentially the same thing
Now, Joshua objects to my statement that the nation of Israel was a type of the church by arguing that the nation of Israel was a type of Christ. But, let’s see where we end up if we combine these two views:
P1. The nation of Israel was a type of Christ
P2. The nation of Israel is essentially the NT church
C: The NT church is a type of Christ
Hmmm. Looks like we goofed somewhere along the line. I think the first syllogism/view is the goof. I agree with what Riddlebarger says in the post Joshua linked to. But the thing is, Riddlebarger’s argument proves my case, not Joshua’s 😉
P1: The nation of Israel was a type of Christ, the true Israel of God
P2: The believing church, through union with Christ, is the true Israel of God (see Riddlebarger’s quote of Strimple in his post)
C: The nation of Israel was a type of the believing church
And so, by implication, Riddlebarger agrees with Jonathan Edwards (and myself) that the nation of Israel was a type of the church. But it is not only by implication. Note what Riddlebarger’s teacher Meredith Kline says:
the socio-geo-political sector of the Israelite kingdom of God was a part of the total system of kingdom typology established through the covenantal constitution given to Israel in the law of Moses… Israel as a geo-political kingdom is…expressive of the restorative-redemptive principle, it is…a type of the antitypical kingdom of Christ, the Redeemer-King… This kingdom of Israel – not just the temple in its midst, but the kingdom of Israel as such, the kingdom as a national geo-political entity – was a redemptive product of God, a work of divine restoration, given as a prototype version of the kingdom of God in the perfect form it was to attain under the new covenant in the messianic antitype of that Israelite kingdom.

Because of the nature of spiritual pride, it is the most secret of all sins. There is no other matter in which the heart is more deceitful and unsearchable and there is no other sin in the world that men are so confident in.
Please take a look at the Index Page to browse for posts.
Tags
Recent Posts
- Federal Vision Baptists?
- Kline’s Abrahamic Covenant of Works 7: R. Scott Clark
- Muller on the Reformed History of Gal 3:17 (Translation & Interpretation)
- Do Presbyterians Have Regeneration Goggles?
- Re: New Geneva Podcast on Baptism
- Hodge on Owen’s Influence Over American Presbyterians
- John Ball on Salvation Prior to Christ’s Death
- Two Age Sojourner Podcast: Reformed Libertarianism & 1689 Federalism (Substance/Administration)
- Abraham not Moses?
- Hodge’s (Baptist) Understanding of the Visible/Invisible Church
Categories
- books (21)
- economics (21)
- film (25)
- health (16)
- news (8)
- photography (1)
- Podcasts (6)
- politics (46)
- recommended (1)
- Reformed Libertarian (39)
- theology (352)
- 1689 federalism (174)
- 20th Century Reformed Baptist View (5)
- abrahamic covenant (31)
- covenant of works (15)
- Davidic Covenant (1)
- dispensationalism (3)
- General (35)
- Leviticus 18:5 (16)
- NCT/Progressive Covenantalism (7)
- new covenant (31)
- old covenant (32)
- OPC Republication Report (5)
- typology (23)
- Westminster Federalism (25)
- baptism (53)
- calvinism (3)
- final judgment (16)
- John Owen (26)
- justification (25)
- sanctification (6)
- science (6)
- Specific Passages (19)
- two kingdoms (15)
- 1689 federalism (174)
- Uncategorized (45)
I Also Contribute To:
Blogroll
- CCEF
- Daniel's Place
- God’s Hammer
- Grace Reformed Baptist Church of Antelope Valley
- Illumination: MCTS Blog
- Particular Voices
- Pros Apologian
- Reformed Baptist Blog
- Reformed Baptist Fellowship
- Reformed Libertarian
- The Confessing Baptist
- The Institute of Reformed Baptist Studies
- The Sovereign Logos
- The Upper Register
Top Posts
- Federal Vision Baptists?
- The False Gospel of Witness Lee and the Living Stream Ministries
- Welcome
- New Covenant Union as Mystical Union in Owen
- They are not all Israel, who are of Israel (Rom 9:6)
- Timeline Snapshot of Justification Debate
- 1 Cor. 10:1-5 - Paedobaptist False Inferences
- Vitamin C 'til You Poop
- Contact
- Neonomian Presbyterians vs Antinomian Congregationalists?
Currently Reading
RSS Feed
Archives
- December 2019 (1)
- July 2019 (1)
- April 2019 (3)
- March 2019 (6)
- February 2019 (4)
- January 2019 (4)
- December 2018 (7)
- November 2018 (1)
- October 2018 (1)
- September 2018 (2)
- August 2018 (3)
- July 2018 (4)
- June 2018 (2)
- May 2018 (2)
- February 2018 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- December 2017 (5)
- November 2017 (3)
- October 2017 (3)
- September 2017 (4)
- August 2017 (5)
- July 2017 (4)
- June 2017 (6)
- May 2017 (7)
- April 2017 (15)
- March 2017 (4)
- February 2017 (14)
- December 2016 (3)
- November 2016 (2)
- October 2016 (8)
- September 2016 (4)
- August 2016 (1)
- July 2016 (2)
- June 2016 (2)
- May 2016 (4)
- April 2016 (4)
- March 2016 (2)
- February 2016 (2)
- January 2016 (5)
- December 2015 (2)
- November 2015 (3)
- October 2015 (8)
- September 2015 (5)
- July 2015 (8)
- June 2015 (2)
- May 2015 (2)
- April 2015 (8)
- March 2015 (5)
- February 2015 (3)
- January 2015 (4)
- December 2014 (2)
- November 2014 (3)
- October 2014 (12)
- September 2014 (8)
- August 2014 (1)
- July 2014 (1)
- June 2014 (3)
- May 2014 (3)
- April 2014 (3)
- March 2014 (2)
- February 2014 (6)
- January 2014 (2)
- November 2013 (3)
- October 2013 (4)
- September 2013 (4)
- August 2013 (5)
- July 2013 (5)
- June 2013 (4)
- May 2013 (5)
- April 2013 (4)
- March 2013 (11)
- February 2013 (7)
- January 2013 (6)
- December 2012 (2)
- November 2012 (4)
- October 2012 (2)
- September 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (4)
- July 2012 (6)
- June 2012 (1)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (3)
- February 2012 (5)
- January 2012 (6)
- December 2011 (4)
- November 2011 (1)
- October 2011 (5)
- August 2011 (3)
- July 2011 (3)
- June 2011 (6)
- May 2011 (2)
- April 2011 (2)
- March 2011 (2)
- February 2011 (3)
- January 2011 (2)
- November 2010 (6)
- October 2010 (2)
- September 2010 (7)
- August 2010 (4)
- July 2010 (7)
- May 2010 (3)
- April 2010 (4)
- March 2010 (6)
- February 2010 (5)
- January 2010 (6)
- December 2009 (1)
- November 2009 (2)
- October 2009 (1)
- August 2009 (1)
- July 2009 (4)
- June 2009 (1)
- May 2009 (3)
- March 2009 (4)
- February 2009 (1)
- December 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (1)
- September 2008 (2)
- August 2008 (2)
- July 2008 (5)
- June 2008 (1)
- April 2008 (4)
- March 2008 (1)
- February 2008 (1)
- January 2008 (1)
- December 2007 (2)
- November 2007 (41)

Recent Comments