Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Divine Secrets: Decoding 666, Antichrist, and the Rapture  /  Dispensationalism – Part 1  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 2
The lesson contrasts a “final covenant” (held by virtually all Christians for 1,800 years) with Darby’s “Church Age” parenthesis; how does each view portray God’s intention for the New Covenant—permanent climax or temporary pause—and what would each view suggest about God’s wisdom in planning redemption?
Another way to ask: Is the New Covenant God’s final plan that completes His work, or a temporary “pause” during a Church Age? What does each view suggest about how wise God was in planning salvation?

Direct Answer Bercot presents historic Christianity as viewing the New Covenant as God’s permanent, final plan, while Darby’s system portrays it as a temporary “parenthesis” before God returns to an Old Covenant-style focus on national Israel—implying very different pictures of God’s purpose and clarity in redemption.

Support from Transcript:

  • For 1,800 years, Christians believed “the New Covenant is the final covenant. It’s in effect now, and it will be in effect for eternity.”
  • Historic view: Christ returns “in glory,” saints resurrected, living “caught up,” then “immediately followed by Judgment Day.”
  • Darby: “the New Covenant did not replace the Old Law Covenant” and we are merely in “the Church Age.”
  • Darby calls the church “unforeseen in the Old Testament” and “merely a parenthesis in God’s plan for Israel.”
  • Darby’s future includes rebuilt temple, renewed sacrifices/feasts, and a re-established Jew/Gentile distinction “throughout all eternity.”
Discussion Follow-ups What does it say about God’s wisdom if He returns to sacrifices and temple worship after Christ? How does a “parenthesis” church affect how you view the church’s role right now?

Jumpstarter 2 of 10
Back Questions Next