"Progressive" Relationship Between The Covenants
Progressive dispensationalists perceive a closer relationship between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant than do most traditional dispensationalists. One of the covenants which highlight the differences between the two views is the New Covenant. In the past, dispensationalists have had a variety of views with regard to the new covenant. Some dispensationalists, including Charles Ryrie and John F. Walvoord in the 1950s, argued for two new covenants: one new covenant for the Church and another new covenant for Israel, see also Dual-covenant theology. Other dispensationalists, including John Nelson Darby and John Master, argued for one new covenant applied only to Israel. And still other dispensationalists, including Cyrus I. Scofield and John McGahey in the 1950s, have argued for one new covenant for a believing Israel today and an ongoing partial fulfillment, and another new covenant for a future believing Israel when Jesus returns for a complete fulfillment.
Progressive dispensationalists, like Blaising and Bock, argue for one new covenant with an ongoing partial fulfillment and a future complete fulfillment for Israel. Progressives hold that the new covenant was inaugurated by Christ at the Last Supper. Progressives hold that while there are aspects of the new covenant currently being fulfilled, there is yet to be a final and complete fulfillment of the new covenant in the future. This concept is sometimes referred to as an "already-but-not-yet" fulfillment.
Read more about this topic: Progressive Dispensationalism
Famous quotes containing the words progressive, relationship and/or covenants:
“A radical is one of whom people say “He goes too far.” A conservative, on the other hand, is one who “doesn’t go far enough.” Then there is the reactionary, “one who doesn’t go at all.” All these terms are more or less objectionable, wherefore we have coined the term “progressive.” I should say that a progressive is one who insists upon recognizing new facts as they present themselves—one who adjusts legislation to these new facts.”
—Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924)
“Our mother gives us our earliest lessons in love—and its partner, hate. Our father—our “second other”Melaborates on them. Offering us an alternative to the mother-baby relationship . . . presenting a masculine model which can supplement and contrast with the feminine. And providing us with further and perhaps quite different meanings of lovable and loving and being loved.”
—Judith Viorst (20th century)
“Love prays. It makes covenants with Eternal Power in behalf of this dear mate.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)