Talk:Dual-covenant theology

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Role of liberal rabbis

I think the concept of dual-covenant theology comes from the modernist branch of Judaism ... at least that's the impression I get from reading about interfaith conferences where prominent liberal rabbis participate. The traditional Christian concept of dual-covenant refers to converted Jews and converted Gentiles, so it doesn't necessarily include non-converted Jews or non-converted Gentiles. The essential point that Paul is making in the New Testament is that the Church forms one people, which can include people of many cultural or ethnic backgrounds. ADM (talk) 02:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed un-sourced material. Bring a source or please leave it out. I believe it is misinformation. Please don't foist it on the reader. Wikipedia uses
sources. Bus stop (talk) 03:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
There is an interesting source here that talks about a 19th century rabbi who used similar terminology to what is now known as dual-covenant theology. Incidentally, the article is written with the help of
Leon Klenicki, a noted liberal rabbi who contributed significantly to interfaith relations between Christians and Jews. [1] ADM (talk) 03:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Question on this sentence

"In contrast, most traditional Christians believe that the Church is the true people of God, and that it comprises the both Jews and Gentiles, who form the mystical body of Christ."

Is this really a contrast? Dual-covenanters also believe that the Church is composed of Jews and Gentiles who form the mystical body ... 75.0.5.105 (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is, because dual-covenanters tend to argue that even atheist Communist Jews would be part of the dual covenant, just becaust they are ethnically or culturally Jewish. Much of the opposition to dual-covenant theology derives from the perception that atheists or kabbalists would somehow be counted as Christians even though they are not Christian at all, being somewhat anti-Christian in their beliefs. Also, the religious tension has very little to do with Old Testament laws, it is all about faith in Christ, since Christ is held to fulfill the law. ADM (talk) 04:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um. What exactly do *communists* have to do with anything? I have no problem with you claiming atheists wont be saved -- if we wanted to, we wouldnt be atheists -- but why communists? You know those rumors about christmas being banned in russia were, you know, not true right? 96.28.157.126 (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand what Dual-covenant theology is. From the lead paragraph:

"Dual-covenant theology is a term found in contemporary
proselytes) must convert to Christianity
. "

You can't keep

atheist at the same time. Also, those who keep the Mosaic Law are not "counted as Christians", it's simply another covenant, the Mosaic covenant, separate from the New Covenant of Christianity. Also, Mosaic Law is the same thing that some Christians, such as yourself, refer to as Old Testament Law. You may believe that "Christ fulfilled the law", but the law in question is the Mosaic Law and Dual-covenent theology rejects the claim that it has been superseded. 75.15.207.94 (talk) 16:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

References

  1. ^ Genesis 17:13

The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible

The document The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, written by the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 2001, has sometimes been cited as an ecclesiastical reference for dual-covenant theology. It would be a good idea if there could at least be a stub on this. [2] [3] ADM (talk) 15:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thinly Veiled Critique of Dual-Covenant Theology

This article is no more than a thinly veiled critique of Dual Covenant Theology. It states, without citation, that most conservative Protestants believe it is a heresy and that Catholics reject it. (Meanwhile, apparently John Paul II accepted it!) Hardly any space is given to explaining what the belief is; most of the article is describing criticisms of it. If someone knows more about it, please add to the content of this article to make it more informative and neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.39.117.185 (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who uses the term "dual-covenant theology" in academia or elsewhere?

I'm not discounting that it might be a useful term ("dual-covenant theology") but when I checked the links provided, most were dead links, and none mentioned the term. "Covenant theology" is a commonly used phrase in theological circles that I am familiar with, but I am not aware of the use of this phrase (perhaps I am just unaware). The subject is quite real, but is the term we are titling the article with? Is the very title of this article original research?  ● Thane — 09:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The term is in use and is somewhat self-explanatory. It's not original research or a neologism, but it does raise the interesting question of who first used the term in print. 75.14.211.243 (talk) 06:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This place calls it "Two Covenant": InPlainSite.org "Two Covenant" : "Many Christian and Jewish groups accept a teaching today, first taught by Franz Rosenzweig earlier this century, that there are two separate but equal covenants or ways to God." 75.14.211.243 (talk) 06:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another possible reference I found: ELCA.ORG: Jewish-Christian Difficulties in Challenging Christian Zionism, The Rev. Robert O. Smith, 05/01/2007 : "Christian Zionists, drawing from the system of biblical interpretation known as premillennial dispensationalism, assert that the covenants made by God with Jews, as a people, are not only eternal, but that they are entirely separate from the covenant between God and Gentile believers. This arrangement is sometimes referred to as "dual covenant" theology. Any other understanding of the relationship, Christian Zionists argue, is a variation of supersessionism." 75.14.211.243 (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The Jews in the time of Jesus", Stephen M. Wylen, Paulist Press, 1996, page 190: "Luke's positive portrayal of Jesus and his family as loyal Jews can be interpreted to support this dual-covenant theology." 75.14.211.243 (talk) 07:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P. Sigal, 'Aspects of Dual Covenant Theology', Horizons in Biblical Theology, 5 (1983) 1-48, at 24-8. 75.14.211.243 (talk) 07:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christ, the Savior of Israel, An Evaluation of the Dual Covenant and Sonderweg intrepretations of Paul's Letters, Michael G. Vanlaningham: "N. T. Wright (The New Testament and the People of God [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992], 473 n. 5), and Nahum N. Glatzer (Franz Rosenzweig—His Life and Thought [New York: Schocken Books, 1953], xxv), credit Franz Rosenzweig with being the first serious proponent of this bi-covenantal approach in which Christianity and Judaism are both seen as legitimate religions and approaches to God and to reality. Cf. Ernest Simon and Edith Rosenzweig, eds., Franz Rosenzweig—Briefe (Berlin: Schocken Verlag, 1935), 73-74; and Rosenzweig’s The Star of Redemption, trans. William W. Hallo (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970), 265-424, esp. 413-16. For Rosenzweig’s life and contribution to dual-covenant theology, see Ronald H. Miller, Dialogue and Disagreement: Franz Rosenzweig’s Relevance to Contemporary Jewish-Christian Understanding (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1989), 55-120; Kai Kjœr-Hansen, “One Way for Jews and Gentiles in the New Millennium,” in To the Jew First: The Case for Jewish Evangelism in Scripture and History, ed. Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2009), 296-300, 345-46." " 75.14.211.243 (talk) 07:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confusingly written

The article could do with a lot of work to make it clearer to a general reader. The "Other Views" section, in particular, is pretty baffling right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.117.82 (talk) 14:13, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Content removal

Brief content re 7 law observers was removed, with an edit rationale that it was "uncitted" (sic) and thus ?OR. Edit was redacted, and explanatory edits for each step of an acknowledged need for correction were painstakingly provided, edit by edit. Content was again immediately completely removed, for a different reason. Will tag article as under improvement when resuming work at later date to prevent edit conflict. FeatherPluma (talk) 06:02, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dual-covenant theology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dual-covenant_theology&oldid=1207044154"