Again? I had to laugh when I saw once again the other day, a post claiming to be a refutation of covenant creation by proving that it turns the God of the Bible into merely a "local" or "tribal" god. I cannot tell you how many times we who hold to a covenantal context for Genesis creation (independently of one another) have shown this to be a strawman. And yet these same detractors (distractors? evaders?) continue to equate and interchange "covenantal" and "local," chanting ad nauseum, "local creation" and "tribal god," and my all-time favorite, "why should we preach the gospel to Chinese people?" with their fingers stuck in their ears. In addition to the clarity this article
provides in distinguishing between the terms "covenantal" and "local," the podcast interview
we did with Tim Martin addresses it also. It baffles me that they are still throwing up that same smokescreen.
Inheriting the promises of the [one and only] everlasting covenant are those redeemed "out of every tribe, tongue, people and nation." How does anyone then procede to translate "covenantal" into "geographically local" or "tribal?"