In Christian theology, Covenant theology falls largely into two camps: discontinuity & continuity. I fall into the camp of continuity.
Now, the problem with Augustine’s view, as you’ve described, is there are plenty of example of first born sons being exemplary like Abraham & Isaac. Some historical Jewish sources speculate that Melchizedek is the first born son of Noah—Shem. Aaron is the first born son to Moses; the younger brother & Aaron is made the priest.
Furthermore, blame on the Jewish people on the death of Christ is problematic because biblically in John’s gospel the context of “The Jews” is clearly the Jewish leadership as other actors in the text are also Jewish. Furthermore, the Patristics like John Chrysostom has a text called “Against the Jews” challenging the Judaism within Christian camps & outside influences, He does write some vile things, but this has to be read in its historical context because during the period Jews were proselytizing Christians & Chrysostom was reacting against such activities in the context.
When it comes to guilt? Peter was a Jew. So, was Paul & others, so again, it’s important to read in John’s gospel & Acts the context of the text.
Who killed Jesus? Anyone who sins.
Now regarding salvation of the Jews within the mediation of Christ, I talk about this in the Eucharistic Revival Project w/ Benjamin Merkle’s work, “there is no consistent interpretation of Romans 11:26 offered by covenant theologians. The identity of “Israel” in Paul’s phrase, “And in this way all Israel will be saved,” is understood to refer to (1) the church, (2) the elect among ethnic Israel throughout history, or (3) a future mass conversion of ethnic Israel.”
And this why I concluded it remains a mystery and debated throughout the history of Christianity.
I think so because I believe it comes down to the 3 options presented by Merkle. How will it play out? I mentioned in the above reflection, for me, it remains a mystery. Jews will be saved, it’s in Sacred Scripture in Romans, but none of us are given any other details. We do know through the magisterium all salvation comes through Jesus Christ.
Yes, and of course, I meant in comparison to Moses w/ Aaron. I think regarding Isaac though I’d argue within the union, but you may have a valid point there regarding Ishmael.
I will say it is a theological question, but it has to do more so with the effects of Original Sin & disobedience universally to humanity. Jesus’ sacrifice is fitting but it is a debt that goes back to Genesis that God cannot go back on His word as Athanasius puts it, I debt that all men inherited as understood by the Catholic Church via Augustine, Aquinas, etc. If not then it would be unjust to be damned to hell for the fall of man & we wouldn’t be made righteous for it without the sacrificial victim being offered for our collective guilt.
Amen!!!!!!
In Christian theology, Covenant theology falls largely into two camps: discontinuity & continuity. I fall into the camp of continuity.
Now, the problem with Augustine’s view, as you’ve described, is there are plenty of example of first born sons being exemplary like Abraham & Isaac. Some historical Jewish sources speculate that Melchizedek is the first born son of Noah—Shem. Aaron is the first born son to Moses; the younger brother & Aaron is made the priest.
Furthermore, blame on the Jewish people on the death of Christ is problematic because biblically in John’s gospel the context of “The Jews” is clearly the Jewish leadership as other actors in the text are also Jewish. Furthermore, the Patristics like John Chrysostom has a text called “Against the Jews” challenging the Judaism within Christian camps & outside influences, He does write some vile things, but this has to be read in its historical context because during the period Jews were proselytizing Christians & Chrysostom was reacting against such activities in the context.
When it comes to guilt? Peter was a Jew. So, was Paul & others, so again, it’s important to read in John’s gospel & Acts the context of the text.
Who killed Jesus? Anyone who sins.
Now regarding salvation of the Jews within the mediation of Christ, I talk about this in the Eucharistic Revival Project w/ Benjamin Merkle’s work, “there is no consistent interpretation of Romans 11:26 offered by covenant theologians. The identity of “Israel” in Paul’s phrase, “And in this way all Israel will be saved,” is understood to refer to (1) the church, (2) the elect among ethnic Israel throughout history, or (3) a future mass conversion of ethnic Israel.”
And this why I concluded it remains a mystery and debated throughout the history of Christianity.
You can also reference the Vatican document that I linked in the article, it goes into some detail on Romans 11.
https://a.co/d/1jaRB9E
the Amazon link to his book that surveys different covenant theology theories.
Again, it comes down to the three presented options: Jews within the Church, a small elect at the end times, or a mass conversion.
I think so because I believe it comes down to the 3 options presented by Merkle. How will it play out? I mentioned in the above reflection, for me, it remains a mystery. Jews will be saved, it’s in Sacred Scripture in Romans, but none of us are given any other details. We do know through the magisterium all salvation comes through Jesus Christ.
Yes, and of course, I meant in comparison to Moses w/ Aaron. I think regarding Isaac though I’d argue within the union, but you may have a valid point there regarding Ishmael.
I will say it is a theological question, but it has to do more so with the effects of Original Sin & disobedience universally to humanity. Jesus’ sacrifice is fitting but it is a debt that goes back to Genesis that God cannot go back on His word as Athanasius puts it, I debt that all men inherited as understood by the Catholic Church via Augustine, Aquinas, etc. If not then it would be unjust to be damned to hell for the fall of man & we wouldn’t be made righteous for it without the sacrificial victim being offered for our collective guilt.