mens hair loss

2009 Covenant Creation Conference-Tim Martin-Lecture 1

by Michael J Loomis on July 26, 2010

The Story of Covenant Creation – Tim Martin. From the 2009 Covenant Creation Conference.

Notes – PDF – The Story of Covenant Creation

Play

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

Peter August 8, 2010 at 9:08 am

Thus far, I can say, along with the final slide in the presentation, I may not agree with everything [in the book], but it makes a lot of good points. I’m totally on board with the covenantal aspect of creation. But I’m having trouble delineating between the “allegory” of Genesis and the rest of the historical books of the OT.

I hope science and history are not bad words to the preterist, for their evidences have proven the existence of historical people, places, things, and ideas mentioned in the Bible. First the natural, then the spiritual.

I take the Biblical accounts of historical events (Jesus did: “In the beginning, He made them male and female…”) as types and shadows of spiritual realities, the seen and unseen worlds, the temporary and the permanent. But maybe we are looking at the same thing from slightly different perspectives. Thanks for provoking, in love, this discussion.(Hebrews 10:24)

admin August 8, 2010 at 9:23 am

I don’t think anyone from the covenant creation camp ever said that it was allegory. Genesis 1-3 is a historical account that did take place approximately 6500 years ago. Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel were real people that lived at a real point in time. The question is…What is it that is being described in the early chapters of Genesis. Is it an account of cosmological creation? Is this how the original audience that lived thousands of years ago would have understood this?

I think the problem is that we are reading our modern day understanding of science and cosmology back into the text.

Regarding Jesus saying, “In the beginning, He made them male and female…” consider this. In Adam, “they were made male and female.” Then the apostle Paul says in contrast, “In Christ(the last adam) they are neither male nor female.”

Also consider Luke 20:34-37 Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

This is language that delineates the old covenant(death) vs. the new covenant(life).

Hope that makes sense.

Tim Martin February 1, 2011 at 8:48 pm

I suppose I should follow up on this presentation. The downloads remain active, and I think the audience from here on out should be aware of some context and history.

It now been almost 2 years since this conference. More more than 3 years have passed since the release of Beyond Creation Science (3rd edition). I have been made aware of recent developments that are remarkably relevant to the content and detail of this presentation.

Samuel Frost has been an outspoken critic of Covenant Creation (and Beyond Creation Science) for many years. He has recently abandoned full preterism in favor of futurism. I think those investigating the relationship between Covenant Creation and Covenant Eschatology should be aware of Frost’s latest comments defending his recent move away from full preterism:

[Begin Quote]

“There are “two” ideas of H&E: micro and macro. The micro passed. The macro, of which the micro is a TYPE of, will eventually pass. Simple… So, yea, I can have one passing in AD 70 (micro) and another passing in the future (macro)… ”

“The micro passed. The macro (the sun and clouds and stuff you see outside) that didn’t pass. Understand? This is exactly what Jordan believes. The micro is a type of the macro. How does he say this? Well, the Temple in Jerusalem is in the old covenant order, right? Is it a ‘type’? When did the old covenant types end? AD 70. Question: what was the destruction of the old covenant order of Jerusalem’s demise a TYPE of? What did Israel symbolize? a larger, People of God? A more COSMIC HEAVENLY TEMPLE? The REAL HEAVENLY TEMPLE? As the old Jerusalem was transformed into the new jerusalem, so also the old ‘heavens and earth’ will be transformed into the new heavens and earth…”

“You are losing it, brother. Your Full Preterism has made you mad……:) Wierd, cause on one hand, I could have swore you agreed with my assessment on Genesis 1-2 and macro (Gen 1) and micro (Gen 2) – common stuff. Now, you turn around here and play these silly games. Let me play this silly game with you as a Covenant Creationist…..So, “heavens and earth passed away” (micro) but this is not the Genesis 1 creation (macro)? They are both called the same thing: heavens and earth…”

“So, again, with these DIFFERENCES in mind, and being very familiar with these guys, which do you think they would say PASSED AWAY in AD 70? the Micro, or the Macro? Now, does the Bible anywhere talk about the perishing of the Macro? Sure does. As God’s new covenant has renewed his People, it has also BEGAN the era of bringing all things under the full power of God’s salvation, including “the creation” itself in order to make it entirely the full home of God’s people – as it was in the beginning and more so beyond the beginning, for we are now in Christ. It is along these lines that I am exploring and I find it much more rich than ‘everything ended in AD 70’. It’s a full orbed biblical worldview that can answer “where have we been” and ‘where are we going”. the last question, you can’t answer. I tried for years……won’t work… ”

— Samuel Frost

http://preterism.ning.com/profiles/blogs/some-preteristic-statements-by

[End Quote]

I trust those who investigate the Covenant Creation model will see the immediate connection to content of this session, presented all the way back at the 2009 Covenant Creation Conference.

Blessings,

Tim Martin

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: