Excellent work has been done in identifying the fourfold sense of Abraham’s seed. I first encountered this framework in John G. Reisinger’s book Abraham’s Four Seeds: A Biblical Examination of the Presuppositions of Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism (1998), which was extremely helpful in clarifying how Scripture speaks of the various “seeds” of Abraham. The concept was later further developed by Stephen J. Wellum and Peter J. Gentry in Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants (2012). Dispensational scholars have also made use of similar categories; for example, see Michael Riccardi’s study, The Seed of Abraham: A Theological Analysis of Galatians 3 and Its Implications for Israel, Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology (2001) and John S. Feinberg in Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments (1988).
I likewise find the fourfold distinction of Abraham’s seed to be a helpful framework for bringing together the full biblical data on this important subject. My primary disagreement with Reisinger, Wellum, and Gentry, however, is that their redemptive-historical model tends to downplay two of the four seeds, despite the significant emphasis Scripture itself places upon them. When a theological model highlights one element within a predefined interpretive framework, it often results—intentionally or not—in the marginalization of elements that do not fit neatly within that framework.
Dispensationalists, by contrast, have sought to account for the totality of the biblical witness without minimizing particular strands of revelation due to prior theological commitments.
