Heresy?
First, let's look at what they say.
One of the Covenant guys, Louis Berkhof, wrote a book entitled Principles of Biblical Interpretation. Concerning prophecy he says that
we must realize that occasionally the prophets transcended their historical and dispensational limitations, and spoke in forms that pointed to a more spiritual dispensation in the future. In some cases the prophetic horizon was enlarged, they sense something of the passing character of the old forms, and gave ideal descriptions of the blessings of the New Testament Church. "(Bold mine)
Now where in the world does that happen in the Old Testament? I don't know!
In his A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, Covenant guy Robert Reymond goes about mixing apples and raw eggs in a yucky interpretative fruit bowl! With a kind of prophetic blindness, Reymond writes,
WRONG! The promise of an earthly messianic reign, with the Jewish nation, from Jerusalem, is still going to happen in a very literal and historic way!
Besides the above amillennial statements above that are wrong, we have Post-millennial comments by theologians like A.H. Strong who believes the church is making things better and better which will usher in the millennial kingdom. He writes virtually heresy: when he says:
Through the preaching of the gospel in all the world, this kingdom of Christ is steadily to enlarge its boundaries, until Jews and Gentiles alike become possessed of its blessings, and a millennial period is introduced in which Christianity generally prevails throughout the earth (Systematic Theology, p. 1008). (Bold mine)
Post-millennialism believes the church is doing such a great job that soon the entire world will be "Christian-ized." Then Christ comes back and begins to reign in the kingdom/church that has won the world for Him.
The problem with both views, the no-kingdom amillennialism, and the we're-making-it-all-better view is that both concepts are WRONG and they are NOT BIBLICAL! But this seems to not bother proponents of both views. Does this violent trashing of the Scriptures somehow, in some way, become heresy?
The Greek word for Heresy
The Greek word for heretic is hairesis. Titus 3:10 defines a heretic: "A man that is a hairetikos "is one who denies true doctrine. To rewrite the concept of Christ's Second Coming, to misplace it, to allegorize it, and to redefine the kingdom, is heresy! This then also gets rid of Christ as King, specifically as Israel's Messiah (Anointed One) and Sovereign who is to reign on earth, not in the church in some false spiritualized way! To do a cover up on the idea of Christ as King, the opponents of Scripture will say, "well yes, but He is now reigning in your hearts!" This is not the way the word is used in both the Old and New Testaments!
To grasp some importance of Christ as the Son of David, the coming Anointed Ruler over Israel, we need to look slowly and carefully at the story of the Canaanite woman's statements in Matthew 15:21-28. She was an outcast from the nation of Israel, a Gentile living in the regions of Tyre and Sidon (v. 21).
The woman's daughter was "cruelly" demon-possessed so she came to Christ and cried out: "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David" (v. 22). Though the woman was a Gentile she knew her Old Testament theology, and she knew how God was working in Israel to bring forth the future King of that nation.
What Really Was Said!
(1) When she said "Have mercy on me" she was alluding to the fact that Israel's King could heal. She got that from Isaiah 53:4 where it says "Surely our griefs He (the Suffering Servant) Himself will bear, and our sorrows He will carry." This is interpreted in Matthew 8:17 that He will both cast out spirits and heal. Jesus does not counter her statement and say: "Well, I'm not going to be a King as you expect. My Father will replace the Church with Israel. You are mistaken!"
(2) When the woman said "O Lord!" she was referring to Psalm 110:1 where the Messiah will someday be seated in heaven on His Father's throne waiting for "His enemies to be made His footstool." Lord is definitely messianic but more! It implies the fact that the Messiah is deity in that He is given the same title "Lord" as God the Father! The woman certainly did not understand all of the theological ramifications of this but she did know her facts from the Old Testament!
(3) Then the woman cries out "Son of David"! This definitely implies His future Kingship over the nation of Israel and over the entire world. He will come back someday dramatically and reign from Jerusalem in a very historic and literal way. This Kingship cannot be "spiritualize," or allegorized, or made in some way to go away, with somehow the nation of Israel poofed into the Church!
Conclusion
Finally, what is even more important is that Christ did not "correct" the woman's preconceptions about His kingly office, His nature as deity (Lord), nor His ability to heal. The Lord gave her an A in what she said! He did no refute her beliefs, but instead, He commended them and said her "faith was great" (v. 28). The faith was first placed in who Jesus was, and then in the fact that He could heal her daughter.
Studying this passage carefully you cannot arrive at Replacement Theology and get rid of the coming Millennial Kingdom of Christ whereby He will rule on earth, in history, over Israel. Replacement Theology then has to be heretical!
