by John G. Reisinger (review by Robert L. Franck)
Understanding always depends upon two things – asking the right questions and making careful distinctions.
Questions. A good question is a key that will unlock a difficult problem or issue. It will throw new light on a subject, clear befuddlement and allow the mind to see the answer. This is true whether you are making a decision, fixing your car, writing software code or formulating theology.
Our concern is theology, of course. If you are reading the NCJ, a major theological issue of yours probably concerns Israel of the Old Testament, the Church of the New Testament, and the relationship between them. Your understanding of this relationship will shape your view of biblical history, prophecy and eschatology and the themes that run through them. Now what question will set your journey in the right direction and lead you to the right destination?
John Reisinger asks that question, which is: “Who is Abraham’s seed?” And then he answers it.
Distinctions. Distinctions are important to both hunters and theologians. Failure to make distinctions kills cows and distorts the Bible, which is more serious. Mr. Reisinger makes careful theological distinctions by identifying the four biblical uses of “Abraham’s seed” and the separate promises to each one. The four seeds are: the natural seed (all of Abraham’s physical children), the special natural seed (national/physical Israel), the spiritual seed (believers), and the unique Seed (Christ).
These distinctions lead Mr. Reisinger into a critique of Dispensational and Covenant theologies. You may ask, “Why does he antagonize those people? He ought to stick to his New Covenant position and leave them alone!” I think that he antagonizes those people—perhaps including you—because it is necessary for understanding. Vetting opposing positions defines and clarifies both of them.
For those of you who have journeyed through Dispensational and Covenant theologies and found them lacking biblical support, you will probably react to the book like I have: “That’s what I was thinking – only I hadn’t worked through it so well!” And for those of you looking to refute the New Covenant perspective, who knows, the question of who is Abraham’s seed just might turn on an unexpected light.
Read well. Read Reisinger.
Excerpts:
“Neither a Jewish birth certificate accompanied by circumcision nor a Christian birth certificate accompanied by baptism ever made anyone heir to a single spiritual promise made to Abraham.” (p. 8)
“Dispensationalism cuts the Bible in half and never the twain shall meet. Covenant Theology does the exact opposite and merges two distinctly different covenants (the Old and the New) into one covenant with two administrations. Dispensationalism cannot get the OT into the NT in any sense, and Covenant Theology does not even have a really New Covenant. They have a newer and older version of the same covenant. Dispensationalism cannot get the two Testaments together, and Covenant Theology cannot get them apart!” (p. 47)
“It is impossible to use the word millennium to denote any prophetic system without creating contradictions and confusion. We need to speak in terms of ‘the Kingdom’ instead of ‘the Millennium,’ and when we do, we will realize that the Kingdom has already come and the Kingdom is yet to come.” (p. 61)
“The physical land is without question the heart of the promise in Psalm 105:6-11, but salvation, or spiritual rest, becomes the heart of the fulfillment of the same promise in Luke 1:68-79 and other NT passages. We do not find even a hint of the physical land of Palestine in Luke’s words. He totally spiritualizes the words found in the OT Scriptures.” (p.91)