Dispensationalism: the basis of Fundamentalism?

[Deus_Solus]

I was brought up in a Plymouth Brethren church (from whence came the foundations of dispensationalism), but never really examined the theological ramifications of it until recently. For a summay of dispensational thought, see this site.

As I’ve studied dispensational theology, I’ve realized how prevalent it is in today’s Fundamentalists of all denominations, as well as how aspects of it influence unsuspecting Catholics’ views of the end times. I believe it is also the basis for some of the most vitrolic attacks on the Catholic Church that we see today.

The basic divisions between Jew, Gentile, and Church, with specific revelations for each group seems to negate viewing Scripture as a coherent whole. Paul is viewed as the “steward” of the Church dispensation, which serves to conveniently (whether consciously or subconsciously) elevate him and his writings above Jesus Himself. God’s special revelation to Paul is binding upon the church today, while Jesus and the Apostles were directed toward the Jews. Some even argue that water baptism is a specifically Jewish institution and not required for the church since Paul did not specifically teach it.

To me, it seems this system of theology has historically served as a method to dispense with Catholic teaching that is contrary to the “solas”. I would like to hear what you all think (Protestant and Catholic alike) about the this system of theology, in defense of it or against it, in understanding its flaws or strong points.

 

[Roman_Army]

It doesn’t work. Please read: The CA Sacraments Tracts

and Church and Papacy Tracts

and Non-Catholic groups tracts

 

[Deus_Solus]

It doesn’t work. Please read: The CA Sacraments Tracts

and Church and Papacy Tracts

and Non-Catholic groups tracts

I’m not trying to advocate it as a cogent theological system. I just want to discuss the positives and negatives of it with those who are familiar with it.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Interesting, Im talking with someone right now on this. I want to read those articles but Ill have to do it later.

 

[Grace_and_Glory]

Here’s a good site explaining some of the errors of dispensationalism:

angelfire.com/ms/seanie/disp.html

Even people who aren’t familiar with dispensationalism itself have probably heard of the Rapture, a key doctrine in dispensational theology. For those who believe dispensationalism, Jesus came to establish an earthly Jewish kingdom but was rejected, so He went to the Church as a kind of Plan B. Eventually, the Church will be taken up to heaven so that God can get back to His covenant with the Jews. Enter the Rapture. This way of thinking makes it seem as though God really isn’t quite sure about what he’s doing, and it negates the entire idea that the New Covenant is a fulfillment and not an abrogation of the Old. Rather than seeing that the New Testament is concealed in the Old and that the Old Testament is revealed in the New, this theology would have us say that the Old Testament has little or no relation to the New Testament.

 

[dfkuz]

Hi! I’m the dfkuz of mid-Acts dispensationalism here! I would be happy to attempt to answer any questions about this Divinely-inspired system of interpreting the Holy Scriptures. (2 Tim. 2:15)

I have to take exception with Grace and Glory’s statement that Dispensationalism teaches that God reacted to Israel’s rejection of Jesus with the Church, the Body of Christ, or ‘Plan B.’ Ephesians 1:4 states that God had chosen us in Christ BEFORE the foundation of the world! Ephesians 3:9 says that God hid the fellowship of this mystery in Himself since from the beginning of the world; and Romans 16:25 says this mystery was kept secret since the world began. Sounds to me like God had the Body of Christ planned all along!

Actually, our mystery program will come to fruition BEFORE the prophetic program God has with Israel, because the moment we’re raptured, we as His Body will unseat the HEAVENLY powers and principalities held by Satan and his demons. The EARTH won’t be fully redeemed back from Satan until after the 1,000 year Reign of Christ is accomplished and Satan is finally thrown into the Lake of Fire after being let loose for a little while to again deceive the nations. Now, that’s taking the Bible, and God’s two-fold plan to redeem the heavens AND the earth (remember Gen. 1:1…that’s why the two are written separately) literally.

God made His covenants with the nation of Israel. There is no covenant with us Gentiles (which includes Jews now that their program is suspended). The Old and New Covenant both relate to Israel only. Of course, all are saved by the Blood of the New Covenant, but that’s where our involvement with it ends. Men are now saved individually by believing God’s new message of Grace given to us through Paul: ‘For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast.’ (Eph. 2:8, 9). Faith in what? ‘Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that He was buried and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.’ (1 Cor. 15:1-4)

The Roman Catholic Church rejects Paul’s gospel and apostolic authority, preferring to return to Israel’s performance-based merit system of faith plus works. Catholicism teaches that if a Catholic dies with an unconfessed mortal sin on his soul, all the grace and faith in the world won’t save him…he’s going straight to Hell! After being water-baptized as an infant and confirmed, the Catholic is pretty much on his own to live up to his part of the bargain, ‘having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.’ (1 Timothy 3:5). Thanks be to God that I realized it’s Paul’s gospel that saves us today, not Peter’s! (Romans 2:16).

Just for enlightenment, some day read 1 Corinthians 3:9-15, and Romans 15:20. Paul is the wise masterbuilder for this Age of Grace; he did not build on the foundation laid by Peter and neither should we.

Believe and be saved! Then be ye followers of Paul as he followed Christ.

 

[dfkuz]

Hi, again! I have a feeling that the thing about Dispensationalism that bothers you all the most is the Rapture of the Church, the Body of Christ.

When you come to understand that the Risen Christ made a totally unexpected surprise visit back to earth, but in the air, to convert Paul and give him a new gospel of salvation by God’s grace through faith alone in Christ alone, then you will understand that in this very same manner, in the air, Christ will return to collect all those who have been saved by that gospel…I like to think of the two secret comings in the air as being the two ‘parentheses’ that border our unique dispensation. Neither one of those comings was prophesied in the Old Testament or even the Gospels. They have nothing to do with Israel’s prophetic program, except that the first coming began the temporary setting aside of God’s direct dealings with Israel; and the second will herald the resumption of God’s dealings with Israel. In between you have a people saved in a way different than Israel was to be. Therefore, as He is not the Author of confusion, God will remove us and our gospel of Grace before resuming His dealings with the Chosen People.

The Church of today is not the ‘Bride of Christ.’ Israel is to be the Bride of Christ. We are His Body. There is a difference. I would much rather be an actual part of Him than just an entity joined to Him, wouldn’t you?

God wouldn’t leave the new believers that will go through the Tribulation and inherit the Kingdom on earth without some specific instructions, would He? Well, he hasn’t! The books of Hebrews through Revelation are right where they should be…following our Pauline epistles, where they await the coming Tribulation believers as their guide through the Day of the Lord. These books are for us to read, but they don’t contain our doctrines. We are saved by grace through faith without works; these books instruct believers who are expected by God to prove their faith BY their works. (James 2:24). That’s how we know they’re not for us today.

The popular ‘Left Behind’ series by LaHaye and Jenkins makes one very fundamental error! The moment after the Rapture, they have people being saved by the same gospel as those who are gone. WRONG!!! Those who place new-found faith in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel will be saved in much the same way as Jesus told the rich young ruler in Luke 18. The Trib believers will have all things in common and rely totally on the Providence of God to get them through the extreme persecution by Anti-Christ. The Lord’s Prayer that Jesus taught His disciples in Matthew 6 will apply to these believers. At the time Jesus taught it to His disciples, the expectation of all, including the Lord Himself (Matt. 24:36), was that the next thing on the time schedule was the seventieth week of Daniel. Jesus could not have made a legitimate announcement, and the apostles later a legitimate offer, of the Kingdom to Israel if He had allowed Himself to ‘know’ that it wasn’t going to happen for 2,000 or so years.

I would NEVER pray the Lord’s Prayer myself now that I understand what an insult it is for a member of the Body of Christ to pray it today! Why on earth would I ask God to forgive me my trespasses AS (or the in the same measure as) I forgive others? What a slap in God’s Face to beg to return to a performance-based merit system like Israel was under when, as Paul tells us in Eph. 1:7 and Col. 1:14 that through His Blood, we HAVE the forgiveness of sins as a present possession! My heart breaks along with the Heart of God when He hears those who claim to be His so callously disregarding His Blessings!

I’d like to say, too, that, yes, John Nelson Darby recovered the truth of the Rapture, although his dispensational theology was not yet as developed as we know it today. And, he had absolutely nothing to do with that MacDonald person people try to link him with. She had demonic visions of the end times that had a very legalistic twist to them, which is what demons always promote, so there is just no connection.

Any questions on the Rapture? Want to go with us? Place your full trust in Jesus Christ alone in His death for our sins on the Cross and His conquering resurrection over death as our eternal guarantee of salvation. ‘For the wages of sin is death, but the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.’ (Romans 6:23) ‘And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.’ (1 Thess. 1:10) ‘For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we shuld live together with Him. Wherefore comfort yourselves together , and edify one another, even as also ye do.’ (1 Thess. 5:9-11)

 

[The_Augustinian]

Hello. I used to be a hyper-dispensationalist myself. There are several reasons why I rejected this belief:

1. It splits up the covenants of God, and makes them contradict one another.
2. It implies that there are separate Churches of Peter and Paul (to the Hebrews and the Gentiles) with radically different “gospels” whereas in fact, the beliefs of both Ss. Peter and Paul were the same (Paul got his teachings from the Apostles) and nowhere in the Fathers or in Church history is there any indication of Peter and Paul having separate beliefs, or there being separate “Kingdom” and “Church” believers.

Dispensationalism is a fantastic heresy which is counter to not only the Catholic Faith but also the Reformers as well, making it a heresy of a heresy. After all, as it is said, heresies and schisms, like other lover life forms, propagate by division.

Peace,

The Augustinian

 

[pnewton]

dfkuz:

I’d like to say, too, that, yes, John Nelson Darby recovered the truth of the Rapture

Where in Church history was this truth lost? Which of the Church Fathers believed this truth Darby recovered?

 

[pnewton]

I understand why dispensationalism is so popular. It answers a lot of questions as to why God is viewed differently throughout the long history of the Bible. Of course the concept of progressive revelation does the same thing but is less flashy. The disparent ways in which the Bible is viewed point to the absurdity of having the Bible apart from the Church it serves, as an authoritative interpreter. The above poster disagrees with LaHaye. If one reads the Barclay commnetaries he would disagree with both.

 

[pnewton]

dfkuz:

The Roman Catholic Church rejects Paul’s gospel and apostolic authority, preferring to return to Israel’s performance-based merit system of faith plus works. Catholicism teaches that if a Catholic dies with an unconfessed mortal sin on his soul, all the grace and faith in the world won’t save him…he’s going straight to Hell! After being water-baptized as an infant and confirmed, the Catholic is pretty much on his own to live up to his part of the bargain, ‘having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.’ (1 Timothy 3:5). Thanks be to God that I realized it’s Paul’s gospel that saves us today, not Peter’s! (Romans 2:16).

Just for enlightenment, some day read 1 Corinthians 3:9-15, and Romans 15:20. Paul is the wise masterbuilder for this Age of Grace; he did not build on the foundation laid by Peter and neither should we.

Believe and be saved! Then be ye followers of Paul as he followed Christ.

This shows a profound lack of knowledge about Catholicism. Instead of demonizinf another faith, it would be best to learn about it, lest one emulates Paul and “kicks against the pricks.”

First, we do not follow a merit based salvation. We know that Paul taught that one can not be saved based on works of the law.
All that enter heaven will only do so by God’s grace. Even our faith is a grace of God. We agree also, with James that faith alone can no save us and with Jesus that it is possible for us to deny Christ and thus be denied by him. Indeed many will call him Lord on the day of judgement only to hear Him say “depart from me.” Do you remember why? Catholic salvation is based in the same Scriptures as Protestant theology is.

Second we do not see the dichotomy between Peter and Paul that you apparently do. They both follow the same Jesus, as do we.

Third, the fact that Paul’s epistle are so plentiful in the New Testament is because the Catholic Church values them and included them in its canon. Martin Luther was not the first to open Scriptures and exclaim, " Where did these come from?"

 

[MiddleBear]

1. In my opinion the foundation for fundamentalism and dispensationalis etc. is pride! Too proud to humbly submit to the authoritative teaching of the Church.
2. A typically American phenomena too. The American religions are really fanciful, and ahistorical. Read the bible mix with some fanciful history shake and voila…a new doctrine, or even new denomination is started.
3. Not being of English heritage, I find the religions that are derived from the various English denominations are really strange. They have alot of English cultural residuals. By that I mean residuals from the English Reformation, a mixture of Puratinism, Methodism and Anglicanism plus English nationalism and political attitudes from 16 th and 17th centuries controversies tossed in.
4. Anyway, rather than arguing about the points of dispensationalisim I would instead point them toward the CCC, Navarre Bible Commentary and encyclicals of the 19 th 20 th century Popes. (Pope Pius IX and later).

Praided be Jesus Christ now and forever.

 

[justcatholic]

There are indeed dispensations revealed in scripture

1,The age of innocence with Adam and Eve
2.Noah and the flood
3.Moses, the Law and Israel
4.Israel’s Kings and captivity
5. The birth and ministry of our Lord
6.Pentecost and the beginning of the church
7.The future tribulation that will come on the earth
8.The coming Antichrist
9. Persecution of the Catholic church
10. The end of the tribulation and Christ’s return
11. Christ’s 1,000 yr reign upon the earth in Jerusalem
12. The final conflict between Satan and those on the earth
13. The great judgment
14. A new heavens and new earth will be made
15. The heavenly city will come down from heaven to earth
16. The eternal age will begin and God will dwell with his children
To fail to distinguish these dealings of God with man is to not properly understand God's plan for man and the ultimate overthrow of evil in the end. :)

 

[Grace_and_Glory]

The Church of today is not the ‘Bride of Christ.’ Israel is to be the Bride of Christ. We are His Body. There is a difference.

If the Church is not the Bride of Christ, why does Paul speak as though it is? “I promised you in marriage to one husband, to present you as a chaste virgin to Christ” (2 Cor 11:2). “For the husband is the head of the Church, the body of which he is the Savior” (Eph 5:23). This isn’t a question of either/or, but rather both/and. The Church is both the Body of Christ and the Bride of Christ.

God wouldn’t leave the new believers that will go through the Tribulation and inherit the Kingdom on earth without some specific instructions, would He? Well, he hasn’t! The books of Hebrews through Revelation are right where they should be…following our Pauline epistles, where they await the coming Tribulation believers as their guide through the Day of the Lord. These books are for us to read, but they don’t contain our doctrines. We are saved by grace through faith without works; these books instruct believers who are expected by God to prove their faith BY their works. (James 2:24). That’s how we know they’re not for us today.

This is circular reasoning. “We don’t think these books are written for us because they contain beliefs we don’t belief, so they must not be written for us.” Your only basis for rejecting these books is because you don’t agree with what they say. This just isn’t logical. Even so, I will confine myself to quoting Pauline epistles to show you that even Paul himself does not promote your theology.
Paul also emphasizes the importance of works in numerous places (Rom 2:13, 2 Cor 5:10, Gal 6:9, Eph 2:10, Philip 2:12-13, Titus 3:8).

God made His covenants with the nation of Israel. There is no covenant with us Gentiles (which includes Jews now that their program is suspended). The Old and New Covenant both relate to Israel only. Of course, all are saved by the Blood of the New Covenant, but that’s where our involvement with it ends.

If our involvement with the New Covenant is separate from God’s dealings with Israel, why is the Church in so many places regarded as the fulfillment of Israel? Paul tells us that true circumcision, the sign of the Jewish covenant, is a matter of the heart (Rom 2:28-29, Col 2:11). He later tells us that not all Israelites truly belong to Israel, but that the children of the promise are the true Israelites, showing that the followers of Christ, both Jew and Gentile, are the true members of Israel (Rom 9:6-8). Paul also tells us that “if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise” (Gal 3:29). He calls the Church “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:16).

 

[RyanL]

dfkuz,

Yours are some surprising beliefs. Let us turn to Scripture to see if St. Paul actually taught what you claim:

St. Paul on Works:

Rom. 1:5 ; 16:26 - “*obedience *of faith” - this commands the human response of subjugation to the Divine will. Dis-obedience means a loss of saving faith. St. Paul includes the phrase like bookends around his letter, to ensure you would understand what he means when he speaks of “faith”.

Rom. 2:7,10 - to those who by patience and good works will be granted glory and honor and peace from the Lord.
Rom. 2:13 – for it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the *doers *of the law who will be justified. Paul is referring to the “law of Christ” in Gal.6:2, not “works of the law” in Rom. 3:20,28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2,5,10; and Eph. 2:8-9. The “law of Christ” is faith in Christ and works based on grace (God owes us nothing) and “works of the law” mean no faith in Christ, and legal works based on debt (God owes us something).

Rom. 4:5-6 – to him who does not work but believes, his faith is accounted to him as righteousness, like David, who was righteous apart from works. Here, Paul is emphasizing that works must be done in faith, not outside of faith. If they are done outside of faith, we are in a system of debt (God owes us). If they are done in faith (as James requires), we are in a system of grace (God rewards us). Hence, Paul accepts the works performed under God’s forbearance (grace) in Rom. 2:7,10,13 (see also Rom. 14:10-12; 1 Cor. 3:12-17; and 2 Corinthians 5:10) which lead to justification and eternal life. These verses have nothing to do with “faith alone.” Paul uses the word “alone” three times in Rom. 4:12,16,23, but never uses it with “faith.” Certainly, if he wanted to teach “faith alone,” he would have done so.

Rom. 6:16 - obedience leads to righteousness. Obedience is a good “work,” an act of the will, which leads to righteousness before God.

2 Cor. 9:8 - Paul teaches that God will bless us so that we may provide in abundance for “every good work.” Good works are encouraged to complete our faith.

2 Cor. 10:15 – this faith must also increase as a result of our obedience, as Paul hopes for in this verse. Obedience is achieved not by faith alone, but by doing good works.

2 Cor. 13:5 – Paul also admonishes us to examine ourselves, to see whether we are holding to our faith. This examination of conscience is a pious Catholic practice. Our faith, which is a gift from God, must be nurtured. Faith is not a one-time event that God bestows upon us.

Phil. 4:17 – Paul says “I seek the fruit which increases to your credit.” Fruits (good works) increase our justification. Paul says these works increase our “credit,” which is also called “merit.” These merits bring forth more graces from God, furthering increasing our justification as we are so disposed. But the fruits, works, and merits are all borne from God’s unmerited and undeserved mercy won for us by Jesus Christ.

Titus 3:8 - good deeds are excellent and profitable to men (just like the Old Testament Scriptures in 2 Tim. 3:16). Good deeds further justify us before God. This verse should be contrasted with Titus 3:5, where we are not saved by works of righteousness “we have done.” As further discussed below, in this verse what “we have done” refers to a work of law or obligation for which we seek payment. But verse 5 also says the “washing of regeneration” in reference to baptism saves, which is a work of grace, for which we are rewarded by God in Christ. There is a distinction between “works of law or obligation” and “works of grace.”

Eph. 2:8-9 – Paul teaches us that faith is the root of justification, and that faith excludes “works of law.” But Paul does not teach that faith excludes other kinds of works, as we will see below. The verse also does not say we are justified by “faith alone.” It only indicates that faith comes first. This, of course, must be true, because those who do works outside of faith are in a system of debt, not of grace (more on that later). But faith alone does not justify. A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone. James 2:24.

May God grant you strength and wisdom,
RyanL

 

[ComradeAndrei]

1. In my opinion the foundation for fundamentalism and dispensationalis etc. is pride! Too proud to humbly submit to the authoritative teaching of the Church.

1. A typically American phenomena too. The American religions are really fanciful, and ahistorical. Read the bible mix with some fanciful history shake and voila…a new doctrine, or even new denomination is started.

1. Not being of English heritage, I find the religions that are derived from the various English denominations are really strange. They have alot of English cultural residuals. By that I mean residuals from the English Reformation, a mixture of Puratinism, Methodism and Anglicanism plus English nationalism and political attitudes from 16 th and 17th centuries controversies tossed in.

Bingo! People in this country have always come up with the oddest heresies. Seems like everyone and his brother if they get the notion start up their own church.

 

[dfkuz]

The Augustinian:

Hello. I used to be a hyper-dispensationalist myself. There are several reasons why I rejected this belief:

1. It splits up the covenants of God, and makes them contradict one another.
2. It implies that there are separate Churches of Peter and Paul (to the Hebrews and the Gentiles) with radically different “gospels” whereas in fact, the beliefs of both Ss. Peter and Paul were the same (Paul got his teachings from the Apostles) and nowhere in the Fathers or in Church history is there any indication of Peter and Paul having separate beliefs, or there being separate “Kingdom” and “Church” believers.

Dispensationalism is a fantastic heresy which is counter to not only the Catholic Faith but also the Reformers as well, making it a heresy of a heresy. After all, as it is said, heresies and schisms, like other lover life forms, propagate by division.

Peace,

The Augustinian

1. The Covenants have nothing to do with Gentiles in this Age of Grace. (Romans 11:26-32) We’re not saved through Israel’s covenants now. Just how do they contradict each other anyway? The New is an amplification of the Old which was going to be written on the believers’ hearts if they accepted Jesus - which Israel will, in the future. (Jer. 31:31-33)
2. How can they be the same gospels, when one is called ‘the gospel of the circumcision,’ and the other, ‘the gospel of the uncircumcision’? (Gal. 2:7-KJV) Peter was taught the gospel of the kingdom by Christ (Matt. 24:14), and Paul was given the gospel of the Grace of God. (Acts 20:24; Eph. 3:2)
   
   And Paul DID NOT get his teachings from the Apostles: ‘But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.’ (Gal. 1:11-12), and, ‘Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me, but I went into Arabia and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter…’ (Gal. 1:17, 18) If it was the same gospel why didn’t Christ just send Paul to the apostles? Seems like He deliberately kept Paul’s gospel from becoming mixed with theirs!
   
   The ‘church fathers,’ and the church history they wrote were based on the opinions of men just like us. They weren’t inspired and could be mistaken - or worse! Paul warned of that in Acts 20:29, 30.

Catholicism is the heresy - it preaches the ‘another gospel’ Paul repeatedly warns the Galatians about!

 

[dfkuz]

RyanL:

dfkuz,

Yours are some surprising beliefs. Let us turn to Scripture to see if St. Paul actually taught what you claim:

St. Paul on Works:

May God grant you strength and wisdom,
RyanL

Hi, Ryan!

Like many Bible students, you are so eager to reconcile James 2:24 with Paul that you must mis-read Paul to do it. When we believe we’re justified (you can’t be ‘further justified’ - you’re either justified or not) and receive the gift of eternal life (it wouldn’t be eternal if it could suddenly become un-eternal!). Paul constantly says ‘we are’ and ‘we have’ and ‘we now,’ because this eternal life is a present possession. Our ‘faithfulness’ didn’t get it and our ‘faithfulness’ doesn’t keep it. When we believe we are now saved by the ‘faith OF Christ,’ not our own. (Romans 3:22; Gal. 2:16). I rest on that fact!

There are a lot of things we SHOULD do for Christ AFTER we’re saved through Him, but our actual salvation is of GRACE - UNMERITED FAVOR. ‘And if by grace, then is it no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace; otherwise work is no more work.’ (Rom. 10:6)

Keep James in his place - Israel’s Program; Rejoice that Paul is our apostle - in this Mystery Program!

 

[pnewton]

1The ‘church fathers,’ and the church history they wrote were based on the opinions of men just like us. They weren’t inspired and could be mistaken - or worse! Paul warned of that in Acts 20:29, 30.

Then why accept their canonization of the New Testament? Why believe that the works of Paul are infallable Scripture except from the the decision made by the early Church? In other words, where is the divinely inspired Table of Contents?

 

[dfkuz]

Grace and Glory wrote:

If our involvement with the New Covenant is separate from God’s dealings with Israel, why is the Church in so many places regarded as the fulfillment of Israel?

Rom. 2:28-29: Here he’s actually talking about Jews.
Col. 2:11: Christ’s Righteousness is now ours - including His circumcision.
Rom. 9:6-8: Here he’s actually talking about Jews again.
Gal. 3:29: Now that we’re ‘in Christ,’ we become Abraham’s spiritual offspring (as He was), heirs to the spiritual blessings Israel would have (and will) enjoy under their New Covenant.
Gal. 6:16: Here he’s talking about the ‘Jerusalem church’ that made up the ‘little flock’ of Israel that would have gone thru the Trib and into the Kingdom if God had not interrupted Israel’s prophetic program with our mystery program.