Salvation History

Salvation History and Covenants in the Early Church

In the early Church, salvation history was understood as God’s progressive revelation and redemptive action across time, aimed at restoring humanity’s communion with Him after the Fall. The concept was rooted in the belief that God, in His mercy, established covenants—solemn, relational agreements—with His people to guide them toward redemption. These covenants were seen as progressive, each building on the previous one, and fulfilled in Christ.

1. Adam and the Protoevangelium:
   The early Church viewed the covenant with Adam as foundational, marked by God’s promise of redemption after the Fall (Genesis 3:15). This “protoevangelium” was interpreted as the first announcement of a savior who would defeat sin, a theme echoed by Church Fathers like Irenaeus, who saw Christ as the New Adam, reversing Adam’s disobedience:

“Just as the disobedience of the one man made many sinners, so also did the obedience of the one man make many righteous” (cf. Romans 5:19).¹

2. Noah:
   The covenant with Noah (Genesis 9:8–17) was understood as a universal promise of preservation, symbolized by the rainbow, ensuring God’s commitment to humanity despite sin. Early Christians saw this as prefiguring the universal scope of Christ’s redemption, extending to all nations. Church Fathers such as Cyril of Jerusalem drew typological parallels between Noah’s Ark and the Church, through which salvation is offered by water—i.e., baptism.²

3. Abraham:
   The Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12:1–3, 15:18) promised land, descendants, and blessing to all nations. The early Church, following Paul (Galatians 3:6–9), saw this fulfilled in Christ, whose universal blessing through the Church extended to Gentiles and Jews alike. Justin Martyr explicitly argued that those who follow Christ, regardless of lineage, are the true heirs of Abraham’s promise.³

4. Moses:
   The Mosaic covenant (Exodus 19–24) established Israel as God’s chosen people, governed by the Law. Early Christians viewed the Law as a “pedagogue” (Galatians 3:24) preparing Israel for Christ, who fulfilled its moral and spiritual demands. Augustine taught that the Mosaic Law was not evil, but preparatory, given to awaken the need for grace and fulfilled in the New Covenant.⁴

5. David:
   The Davidic covenant (2 Samuel 7:12–16) promised an eternal kingdom. The early Church interpreted Christ as the Davidic Messiah, whose eternal reign was realized spiritually in the Church and eschatologically in the Kingdom of God. The Gospel of Luke affirms this in the angel’s words to Mary: “The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David… and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:32–33).

The early Church saw these covenants as stages in God’s redemptive plan, each pointing to Christ. The New Covenant, established by Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20), was understood as the culmination, fulfilling and surpassing all prior covenants by offering universal redemption through Christ’s sacrifice.

The New Testament on Christ and Salvation History

The New Testament presents Christ as the fulfillment of salvation history, the one through whom God’s covenants find their ultimate meaning. Key texts include:

• Matthew 5:17: Jesus declares, “I have not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets but to fulfill them,” positioning himself as the culmination of Israel’s covenantal history.

• Romans 5:12–21: Paul contrasts Adam’s disobedience with Christ’s obedience, framing Christ as the New Adam who restores what was lost through sin.

• Galatians 3:16–29: Paul interprets the Abrahamic promise as fulfilled in Christ, the “seed” through whom all nations are blessed, with the Church as the new covenant community.

• Hebrews 8–10: The Epistle to the Hebrews emphasizes Christ as the high priest of the New Covenant, whose once-for-all sacrifice surpasses the Mosaic Law’s temporary atonements.

The New Testament portrays Christ as the mediator of the New Covenant, fulfilling the promises made to Israel while extending salvation to all humanity. The Church, as Christ’s body (1 Corinthians 12:27), is depicted as the community where this covenant is lived out, particularly through the Eucharist (1 Corinthians 11:25).

The Church Fathers on Christ and the Church

The Church Fathers elaborated on this framework, emphasizing Christ’s role as the fulfillment of the covenants and the Church as the new Israel. Key perspectives include:

• Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, c. 150 AD): Justin argued that Christ fulfilled the Law and the Prophets, and the Church, comprising Jews and Gentiles, is the “true Israel” inheriting Abraham’s promises. He saw the Old Covenant’s rituals as types prefiguring Christ’s sacrifice (e.g., Dialogue 40–41).⁵

• Irenaeus (Against Heresies, c. 180 AD): Irenaeus developed the concept of recapitulation, where Christ, as the New Adam, sums up and restores all prior covenants. He viewed the Church as the universal community where God’s plan is realized, uniting all peoples (AH 3.22.4).⁶

• Augustine (City of God, c. 413–426 AD): Augustine saw salvation history as a progression from the earthly city (marked by sin) to the City of God, fulfilled in Christ and embodied in the Church. He interpreted Israel’s history as preparatory for the universal Church (Book 16).⁷

The Fathers consistently viewed the Church as the fulfillment of Israel, not its replacement. They emphasized continuity: Israel’s covenants were preparatory, and Christ’s New Covenant perfected them, with the Church as the community where Jews and Gentiles are united in God’s plan (Ephesians 2:11–22). This avoided a strict supersessionist view, as the Fathers maintained respect for Israel’s enduring role in salvation history (e.g., Romans 11:17–24, where Paul describes Gentiles as grafted into Israel’s root).⁸

The Church as the Fulfillment of Israel

The early Church saw itself as the fulfillment of Israel in a spiritual and eschatological sense, not a rejection of Israel’s covenantal status. The Church was understood as the “new Israel” because it inherited the promises made to Abraham and fulfilled in Christ, who opened salvation to all nations. This is evident in:

• Biblical Imagery: The New Testament applies Israel’s titles to the Church, such as “a chosen race, a royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9, echoing Exodus 19:6).

• Liturgical Continuity: Early Christian worship, rooted in Jewish practices, saw the Eucharist as fulfilling the Passover and Temple sacrifices.

• Patristic Teaching: Fathers like Justin and Irenaeus emphasized that the Church universalizes Israel’s vocation, making God’s covenant accessible to all through Christ.

However, the Fathers did not entirely dismiss Israel’s ongoing role. Paul’s teaching in Romans 11:25–29, that “all Israel will be saved” and that God’s covenant with Israel is irrevocable, influenced thinkers like Augustine, who maintained hope for Israel’s eschatological restoration.

Contrasting against Supersessionism and Dispensationalism

In contrast to the early Church’s nuanced view, two modern theological frameworks—supersessionism and dispensationalism—offer distinct interpretations of salvation history, Israel, and the Church.

Supersessionism

• Origin: Supersessionism, also known as replacement theology, emerged more explicitly in medieval theology but has roots in some patristic writings. It became prominent during the Middle Ages, particularly after the Council of Florence (1431–1445), which emphasized the Church’s role as the sole means of salvation.⁹

• Core Idea: The New Covenant in Christ entirely supersedes the Old Covenant, rendering Israel’s covenantal status obsolete. The Church is seen as the new and exclusive people of God.

• Problems and Contradictions:

  • Neglect of Romans 11: Supersessionism struggles to reconcile Paul’s affirmation of Israel’s irrevocable covenant (Romans 11:29) and the promise of its future salvation.

  • Anti-Semitism: Historically, it has fueled anti-Semitic attitudes by devaluing Jewish identity and covenantal history.

  • Oversimplification: It reduces salvation history to a replacement narrative, ignoring the organic continuity emphasized by the Fathers and the New Testament.

Dispensationalism

• Origin: Dispensationalism arose in the 19th century, primarily through John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) and the Plymouth Brethren. It gained traction through the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), which popularized its framework among American evangelicals.¹⁰

• Core Idea: Salvation history is divided into distinct “dispensations” or eras, with a sharp division between Israel and the Church. Israel is seen as God’s earthly people with a literal future restoration in a millennial kingdom, while the Church is a temporary “parenthesis” in God’s plan.

• Problems and Contradictions:

  • Dual Covenantalism: Dispensationalism posits two parallel plans—one for Israel and one for the Church—contradicting New Testament teachings that both are united in Christ (Ephesians 2:14–16).

  • Minimization of Christ’s Fulfillment: It downplays the idea that Christ fulfills all the covenants. The Church becomes an interlude, not the climax of salvation history.

  • Lack of Historical Roots: Dispensationalism has no precedent in early Christianity. Church Fathers unanimously viewed the Church as the continuation and fulfillment of Israel, not a separate program. As Richard Bauckham notes, this kind of strict Israel/Church dualism “is without historical foundation in the early Church.”¹¹

  • Futurist Speculation: Many dispensationalist schemes rely on highly literalistic, futurist interpretations of prophecy, often divorced from historical context or ecclesial tradition.

Conclusion

The early Church understood salvation history as God’s redemptive plan unfolding through covenants with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David, fulfilled in Christ’s New Covenant. The New Testament and Church Fathers portrayed Christ as the mediator who completes Israel’s promises, with the Church as the new Israel, uniting Jews and Gentiles in God’s universal plan. This view emphasized continuity and fulfillment, avoiding the extremes of later theological developments. Supersessionism, emerging in the Middle Ages, problematically dismisses Israel’s ongoing role, while dispensationalism, a 19th-century innovation, creates an artificial separation between Israel and the Church. Both diverge from the early Church’s balanced perspective, which saw Christ and the Church as the culmination of salvation history while respecting Israel’s enduring covenantal significance. The Catholic perspective, rooted in Scripture and tradition, offers a framework that integrates continuity and fulfillment, avoiding the contradictions of these modern theologies.

Footnotes

return to top ⇑