|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 4, 2023 10:48:28 GMT -5
These are bad quotes found on the web
From Got Questions
Merriam-Webster defines New Israel as “the Christian fellowship of believers: the Christian Church.” This definition would be disputed by many evangelical believers and scholars. Is the church really the new Israel? And, if so, what is to become of the old Israel? What about Jewish believers today? The relationship of Israel and the Church has been debated for centuries and probably will continue to be a source of controversy until the Lord returns. With the Holocaust still fresh in our collective memories, the charges of anti-Semitism often come up in the discussion as well.
There are several distinct approaches to the issue of Israel and the Church, and it is our hope that this article may give some clarity and charity to the topic as well as answer the question about New Israel.
Classical dispensational theology proposes a radical difference between Israel (the Jewish people) and the Church (New Testament believers in Christ). Looking at Israel and the Church as two trees, God planted and tended to Israel, but she bore no fruit, so God cut down the tree leaving the stump and roots intact. He then turned His attention to a new tree, the Church. Currently, the Church is bearing fruit, and, when her time is complete, the Church will be raptured and transplanted to heaven. The old stump of Israel will sprout again. God will cultivate her, and she will finally bear fruit. The Church does not replace Israel, nor is the Church considered a “new” Israel. In this theological construct, there is no “new” Israel, only Israel and the Church—two separate entities.
Continuing the tree analogy, replacement theology agrees that Israel bore no fruit. But, instead of cutting her down and leaving the stump and roots intact, God uprooted and destroyed her. In her place, He planted a new tree—the Church—who took over all the functions and promises of Israel. In this view, the Church is the New Israel.
While these two views seem to be the most common, they do not exhaust all the options. When the biblical evidence is carefully examined, it appears that, instead of cutting down the tree of Israel, God simply removed the unbelieving branches and then grafted in new Gentile branches (Romans 11:17–20). Right now, the Gentile branches are much larger and thicker than the Jewish branches; however, God is not finished with the Jews, and one day we expect to see them come to Christ en masse. God has not rejected ethnic Israel (Romans 11:1). The church has not replaced Israel, but Gentile believers have become a part of Israel in this sense—it is believers in the Jewish Messiah who are true Israel, whether they be Jew or Gentile. There is no “new” Israel, simply a continuation of Israel and a distinction between believing and unbelieving Israel.
Does the claim of replacement theology that the Church is the New Israel amount to anti-Semitism? It seems that the charge of anti-Semitism would only be appropriate if those who hold to replacement theology were opposed to Jews because they are Jews. Generally speaking, they are not. They simply believe that the Jews as an ethnic people have forfeited their special position because the majority have rejected Christ. A true anti-Semite would oppose all Jews, whether or not they are believers. (For instance, in Nazi Germany, Jews who were Lutheran pastors were forced out of the ministry and out of the church because of their ethnicity, regardless of their Christian faith.)
The Bible has always condemned unbelieving Israel in the strongest possible terms. Look at some of the terminology used by the Old Testament prophets—Hosea 4:15, Jeremiah 3:6, and Amos 2:6–8, for example. The apostle Paul speaks of unbelieving Jews who oppose the gospel this way: “For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved—so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them at last!” (1 Thessalonians 2:14–16). But Paul was not an anti-Semite (he was a Jew himself), and he also wrote, “I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit—I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen” (Romans 9:1–5).
There is no “New Israel.” The Church has not become a new Israel, nor has it taken the place of old Israel. Simply put, followers of the Jewish King, believers in the Jewish Messiah make up true (not new) Israel. If those followers are Gentiles, then they have been grafted in and given citizenship in Israel—that is, they have been made part of the people of God. Today, the majority of Jesus’ followers are Gentiles while the majority of Jews are not His followers; however, we do expect that to change one day as God will once again move within the hearts of ethnic Israel. Even now, we see more and more ethnic Jews take their place in true Israel as subjects of the King. Incidentally, these believers are not welcome to return to Israel as citizens, as they are not considered bona fide Jews by the Israeli government. Perhaps these Jews, if anyone, should be considered New Israel.In Romans 11:11–24 Paul compares Israel to the natural branches of a cultivated olive tree and the Gentile believers to the branches of a wild olive tree. Some of the natural branches (Israel) were broken off, and the wild branches (Gentiles) were grafted in (verse 17). The Gentiles, then, have been made partakers of the promises and inherit the blessings of God’s salvation.
It is important to understand how God called Israel to be His people and how they failed to fulfill that calling. As the seed of Abraham, the children of Israel were chosen by God to be a separate people, holy to the Lord. God’s design was for them to be a light to the Gentiles so that they, too, might know God (Genesis 18:17–19; Isaiah 42, 49). Instead, the Israelites chased foreign gods and betrayed their calling (Ezekiel 23; Hosea 11). But God, who knew they would do this, had already promised to restore His kingdom to Israel after they rebelled and then eventually repented (Deuteronomy 30:1–10). So God sent His Son, preceded by a forerunner, to invite Israel to “repent, for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17).
However, when Jesus revealed Himself as the promised Davidic King who would restore Israel (Matthew 11—12; Acts 3:19–22), He was rejected by the Jews, exactly as Isaiah had prophesied (Isaiah 52—53). Jesus therefore called His disciples to fulfill Abraham’s commission to bless the nations (Genesis 12:2–3) by preaching the gospel of the Kingdom to all nations until the end of this age (Matthew 28:18–20). Paul thus preached the gospel of the Kingdom to the Jews and was repeatedly rejected (Acts 13—28); in consequence, Paul brought the good news to the Gentiles, who in turn became Abraham’s spiritual seed by faith and heirs of the promises to Abraham and his seed (Galatians 3—4). This is what Paul meant in Romans 11 by the Gentiles being “grafted” into the “olive tree” and nourished by the “root” (the promises to Abraham). The tree thus signifies the collective people of God; the “wild branches” grafted in are Gentile believers; the “natural branches” that are cut off are the Jews in unbelief. Jewish believers remain in the tree but are joined with Gentiles and “made” into a “new body,” the Church (Ephesians 2:11–22).
Paul anticipated a question that would surely arise among his Gentile readers: “I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall?” (Romans 11:1)—Gentile believers would be tempted to dismiss Israel because it appeared they would never recover. Even today, there are those who advocate supersessionism or replacement theology, which holds that the Church has completely replaced Israel and will inherit the promises to be fulfilled only in a spiritual sense. In other words, according to this view, ethnic Israel is forever excluded from the promises—the Jews will not literally inherit the Promised Land. What then would happen to Israel? What about the Old Testament prophecies that Israel as a nation would repent and be re-gathered to the land in the last days as a permanent possession (Deuteronomy 30:1–10)?
Romans 11 thus conclusively shows Gentile believers that God is not yet “done” with Israel, who has only temporarily lost the privilege of representing God as His people. Since “the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable” (11:29), “all Israel will be saved” in order to fulfill God’s covenant with ethnic Israel (11:25–28), including the promise of land inheritance (Deuteronomy 30:1–10).
While some of the “natural branches” were cut off because Israel failed, God’s purposes are not complete until Israel is also grafted back into the people of God to share in the promises to Abraham and his seed. This brings full circle God’s larger redemptive plan (Romans 11:30–36) for both Jews and Gentiles as distinct populations within the people of God in the Davidic (or Millennial) Kingdom. Indeed, the prophets saw this Kingdom as the “final form” of the olive tree, so that Israel—reversing roles—would then bless the Gentiles, enabling them to join the people of God (see Zechariah 8:13, 20–23).
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 4, 2023 10:54:05 GMT -5
Pt.2
The phrase spiritual Israel is used in two primary contexts. The first is as a reference to the entire body of Christian believers, in distinction to the political or racial people of Israel. Spiritual Israel is also sometimes used to suggest concepts related to replacement theology, in which the promises directed toward Israel are now given to the Church, instead.
Galatians 6:16 refers to the “Israel of God.” Given how frequently Paul dismisses ethic or national divisions in this same letter (Galatians 3:26; 4:5–7; 6:15), it is unlikely that he encourages such divisions here. Instead, he refers to the readers as being similar to Isaac: they are the “children of promise” (Galatians 4:28). Paul has a spiritual group in mind in Galatians 6:16, not an ethnic one. This reference to spiritual Israel is clear enough, but not every reference by Paul to Israel is spiritual in nature. Some, such as Romans 9:4, are national and literal. The context is key.
There are other places in the New Testament that suggest a “spiritual Israel” in that they echo terms used in the Old Testament to refer to the Israelites. First Peter 2:9 uses the same terminology as Exodus 19:5–6 in reference to Christians. Galatians 3:29 uses the term heirs, as does Isaiah 65:9. All Christians are “fellow citizens” and members of the house of God, according to Ephesians 2:12–13. Romans 10:12 also says the same—there is no national preference with respect to salvation. Just as we become spiritual “sons of Abraham” by faith (Galatians 3:7), so we can be considered “spiritual Israel” when we receive Christ. In the sense that ethnicity and politics have no relationship to salvation, the term spiritual Israel presents no noteworthy problems.
Replacement theology, on the other hand, uses the concept of a “spiritual Israel” differently. Replacement theology essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan and that the many promises God made to Israel are fulfilled in the Church instead—Old Testament prophecies are allegorized in order to make them applicable to the church. Replacement theology presents major theological problems, because Scripture says that God has not forgotten or changed His promises to Israel (see Romans 11:1–2, 11, 23, 26, 29). Teaching that promotes a “spiritual Israel,” in the sense that the Church is the focus of God’s prophetic promises for Israel, is not biblically valid.
In Galatians 3:7, Paul, writing to Gentiles, says, “Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham” (ESV). Here Paul advances the idea of a spiritual family in contrast to a physical family—a family sharing faith rather than a bloodline.
Obviously, Abraham had literal, physical descendants. It was they, through Isaac and Jacob, who became the nation of Israel, God’s chosen people. However, many in Israel did not follow God the way that they should have. At the same time, there were some Gentiles in the Old Testament, like Rahab and Ruth, who were adopted into the family of Israel. In the New Testament, many Gentiles are “grafted” into the tree of Israel through their faith in Jesus, the Messiah of Israel (Romans 11:17–20).
Throughout the New Testament, we see that being physical descendants of Abraham, although culturally important, counts nothing for eternity. When John the Baptist was preaching to the Jews, he warned, “Do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Matthew 3:9). John’s point was that more important than their physical lineage was their spiritual lineage.
In John 8:32–41, Jesus is speaking to some Israelites who were by definition descendants of Abraham. However, Jesus says that their physical lineage is overshadowed by their negative spiritual lineage:
[Jesus said] “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
“They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”
Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.”
“Abraham is our father,” they answered.
“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the works of your own father.”
Twice, Jesus agrees that they are Abraham’s children but implies they really have another father. In verse 44 He states it plainly: “You are of your father the devil.” Their spiritual lineage trumped their physical lineage. Whatever blessings they counted on as physical “sons of Abraham” were negated by their condition as spiritual “sons of the devil.” Entrance to the kingdom will not be based on physical DNA but on faith in the Son of God.
In Romans 9:6–7 Paul explains, “For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children.” In other words, there are some people who are descendants of Israel (Jacob), but they are not part of the blessing of Israel. Likewise, there are some who are descended from Abraham but not “sons of Abraham” in a spiritual sense. Being a descendant of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob is not enough. One must also now be a “descendant” of Christ. Of course, Christ had no physical descendants, but, at the end of Romans 9, Paul explains that those who have faith like Abraham had are made righteous before God, just as Abraham was. Those without faith in Christ, even if they are physical descendants of Abraham, are excluded; those with faith in Christ, even if they are Gentiles, are included as spiritual “sons of Abraham.”
In Galatians 3, Paul states it all plainly: “So also Abraham ‘believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’ Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. . . . So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith” (Galatians 3:6–9). To be a “son” of someone is to have that person’s traits. To be the “Son of God” is to have God’s traits. To be a “son of Abraham” is to display a character quality of Abraham, namely, faith. Everyone who evinces faith is showing himself to be like Abraham in the sense that Abraham, too, had faith (Genesis 15:6).
Abraham heard from God and believed. Abraham’s faith caused him to leave everything behind and live the rest of his life as a stranger in a strange land. Abraham’s faith trusted that he and Sarah would have a child, even though that seemed impossible. Abraham’s faith was even willing to sacrifice the promised son, believing that God would raise him from the dead (Hebrews 11:9). Because of Abraham’s example of faith, the Bible points to him as the father of faith, as it were. All who similarly trust in the Lord are “sons of Abraham.” As Paul writes, “So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile . . . for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:26–29).
God had promised Abraham that “all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” (Genesis 12:3). One way this prophecy is fulfilled is through the salvation that God grants to us, by grace through faith: “Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed.’ So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith” (Galatians 3:7–9, ESV).
A children’s Sunday school song has the line “Father Abraham had many sons; many sons had Father Abraham.” It’s a truth of Scripture expressed simply in those lyrics and stated clearly in Galatians 3:29, “Now that you belong to Christ, you are the true children of Abraham. You are his heirs, and God’s promise to Abraham belongs to you” (NLT).
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 26, 2023 12:39:16 GMT -5
"Replacement Theology" - Is It Wrong to Use the Term? (Part 1)
Paul Henebury Tue, 03/21/17 12:00 am
Replacement TheologyCovenant TheologyHermeneuticsSeries - Replacement
Image
Recently I have been reminded of the Reformed community’s aversion to the label of supercessionism, or worse, replacement theology. In the last decade or so particularly I have read repeated disavowals of this term from covenant theologians. Not wanting to misrepresent or smear brethren with whom I disagree, I have to say that I struggle a bit with these protests.
“We are not replacement theologians” we are told, “but rather we believe in transformation or expansion.” By some of the objectors we are told that the church does not replace Israel because it actually is Israel — well, “true Israel” — the two designations are really one. This move is legitimate, they say, because the “true Israel” or “new Israel” is in direct continuity with Israel in the Old Testament.
In this series of posts I want to investigate the question of whether it is right; if I am right, to brand this outlook as replacement theology and supercessionism.
Basics: What Is a “Replacement”?
A good thing to do as we begin is to have a definition of the word at issue. Websters New World Dictionary defines the word “replacement” thus:
1. a replacing or being replaced 2. a person or thing that takes the place of another…”
The entry for “replace” says,
1. to place again; to put back in a former or the proper place or position. [obviously, this does not apply to our question.]
2. to take the place of… 3. to provide a substitute or equivalent for.
The synonym “supersede” means that something is replaced by something else that is superior. In the way I use the terms in a theological context I mean “to take the place of.” The third meaning (i.e. to substitute) is somewhat relevant since some may be claiming that OT Israel has been switched out for another Israel. By “supercessionism” then, I mean any theology that teaches a switching out of “old Israel” with “new,” “true Israel.”
The question before us is whether the Church takes the place of Israel in covenant theology, and if so how? To answer that question we must ask several more. These include such important questions as, ‘what exactly do covenant theologians say about the matter? And do they ever use replacement terminology themselves?’; ‘Can their understandings of Israel and the church, and so their “expansion” language, be supported from the Bible?’
If “Israel” and “the church” are the same thing then clearly we have our answer, and I can stop writing. If the church and Israel are the same any question of replacing one with the other starts and stops with the simple swapping of names.
Identifying “Israel”
In the Old Testament Israel is either a person, the man Jacob who was renamed “Israel” by God in Genesis 32:28, or the nation of people (sometimes a part of them either in rebellion or redeemed) who stem from Jacob who are called “the children of Israel” in Genesis 32:32 (Israelites), or a designation for the promised land (cf. Josh. 11:16, 21).
Covenant theology adds to these designations another. For example, an anonymous devotional at Ligonier’s website entitled “Who is Israel?” claims that,
Finally, the term Israel can also designate all of those who believe in Jesus, including both ethnic Jews and ethnic Gentiles. In Galatians 6:16, the Apostle applies the name Israel to the entire believing community—the invisible church—that follows Christ. Paul does not make this application specifically in Romans 11; however, this meaning is clearly implied in his teaching about the one olive tree with both Jewish and Gentile branches (vv. 11-24).
Although nowhere does the New Testament explicitly equate Israel with the church, the assumptions that lead the writer to his conclusion (not to mention his exegesis of Gal. 6:16 and his use of the Olive Tree metaphor) come into focus once his view of the church is understood.
Chapter Twenty-five of the Westminster Confession of Faith defines the Church like this:
I. The catholic or universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that fills all in all.
II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.
You will notice that this definition places every saved {elect} person in human history into the Church. It also places all the those elect who will be saved into the Church. The Church is also seen as the Body of Christ, as well as “the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God” outside of which there is no salvation.
Acceptance of this definition pretty much wraps things up as far as OT Israel is concerned. The saved saints under the Mosaic covenant were simply the Church of the time. Also, the kingdom which was repeatedly promised to the remnant of Israel is, well, the Church. Not the land, not Jerusalem, not the national throne or the temple on Mt. Zion, just the Church.
There is reason to dissent from the honored position of the Puritans cited above, and I shall have to do so later on. But right here my intention is simply note that according to this way of thinking the elect Church and elect Israel are the same thing. If this is the right tack then there is nothing wrong with the following thought from Anglican theologian Gerald Bray:
As men and women who have been grafted into the nation of Israel by the coming of Jesus Christ, Christians…lay claim to [the] love and the promises that go with it. – God Has Spoken, 41
Very well, we are to believe that Christians have been grafted into Israel. Bray too is alluding to Paul’s metaphor of the Olive Tree in Romans 11. Again, “Israel” here must mean believers, therefore, all believers are “Israel.” That is, IF these claims are true.
(To be continued…)
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 26, 2023 12:45:55 GMT -5
Caterpillars, Butterflies, and Replacement Theology
NOVEMBER 18, 2019 | SAM STORMS
©
Unsplash
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
MORE BY SAM STORMS
Did Jesus Have a Fallen Human Nature?
Does Matthew 8 Teach Physical Healing in the Atonement?
1 Peter
Why We Need the ‘Plurality Principle’
Will Some Christians Smell Like Smoke on Judgment Day?
Many times I’ve been asked by church members if I believe in “replacement” theology. Although this is a massively complex subject, I’ve tried to provide a brief answer.
All biblical interpreters recognize development between the Old Testament and the New. Some say the Old Testament is the seed which becomes the flower in the New. Others speak of the relationship as one of symbol to substance, or type to anti-type.
The point is we must strive to understand the obvious progress in redemptive history. And when I look at the relationship between Israel and the church, I see something similar to the relationship between the caterpillar and the butterfly.
The butterfly doesn’t replace the caterpillar; the butterfly is the caterpillar in a more developed and consummate form. The butterfly is what God intended the caterpillar to become. Likewise, the church doesn’t replace Israel; the church is Israel as God always intended it to be.
What we see in the New Testament, then, isn’t the replacement of Israel but an expanded definition of who Israel is. During Old Testament times, a person was an Israelite (primarily) because they were a physical, biological descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Ethnicity was the deciding factor.
But with the coming of Christ and the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles, the meaning of what constitutes a “true Jew” has undergone revision—or perhaps a better word is “expansion.” Not one believing Jewish person has been replaced. Not one believing Jewish person has been set aside or lost their promised inheritance.
True Jewishness
God now says a true Jew is one who is circumcised in heart and not just in the physical body (Rom. 2:28–29). The key passages are Galatians 3:16–18 and 3:25–29. Paul says the promises were made “to Abraham and to his offspring” (v. 16). (I prefer the translation “seed” instead of “offspring,” but the point is the same either way.)
In other words, when God gave the promises to Abraham and his seed in Genesis 12–17, it appeared he had in mind Abraham and all his physical progeny. But we later learn it was limited to the progeny of Isaac, and not Ishmael. Then we learn it’s been narrowed down even further to be the progeny of Jacob, and not Esau. When we get to the New Testament, Paul says it’s been narrowed down even further, to one Jewish person:
Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring/seed. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. (Gal. 3:16)
God’s ultimate meaning in the Abrahamic covenant was that all the promises would be fulfilled in only one of Abraham’s physical seed/progeny: Jesus Christ. Just when you conclude that’s impossibly narrow, however, Paul opens it up:
For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. . . . And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. (Gal. 3:28–29)
So, the relevant question now isn’t whose blood is in your veins (physically speaking), but whose faith is in your heart (spiritually speaking). If you have faith in Jesus and thus are “in” him, you become the seed of Abraham who will inherit the promises. When it comes to who inherits the promised blessings, being an ethnic Jew or Gentile doesn’t matter. The only thing that finally matters is whether or not you’re in Christ by faith.
It isn’t replacement but fulfillment.
So, a true seed of Abraham or “true Jew” isn’t a matter of physical descent, but of spiritual new birth. No one has been replaced. All ethnic Jews who are in Christ by faith are the seed of Abraham—and no less so is it true of all ethnic Gentiles who are in Christ by faith.
This is why Paul had the audacity to say believing Gentiles are now equal members of the “commonwealth of Israel” (Eph. 2:12) and “fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (Eph. 2:19).
Christ Dismantled the Wall
In Christ, the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile has been torn down; he “has made us both one” (Eph. 2:14) and created “in himself one new man in place of the two” (Eph. 2:15). This “one new man” is the church of Jesus Christ, filled with believing Jews and believing Gentiles alive, co-heirs of the promises made to the Old Testament patriarchs.
The old covenant into which God entered with Abraham’s physical descendants was always designed to be temporary until the coming of Messiah and the new covenant. This is the consistent message of the book of Hebrews. Now, any person of any ethnicity enjoys equal status as heirs of God’s promises so long as they believe in Jesus.
Whether or not God will save the last generation of ethnic Jews living just before Christ’s second coming is a matter of debate. I hope that’s true! Who could possibly protest? But there are texts on both sides of the issue, and God-honoring, Bible-believing Christians end up with differing answers (especially Romans 11:25–29).
Regardless of one’s conclusion on that matter, though, I still believe whoever gets saved—whether now, during the course of history, or when Christ returns—will be members of the one body of Christ, the church, equal heirs of all his promises.
Inclusion Theology
So I don’t believe God’s saving work among ethnic Jews means he will reconstitute the old covenant theocracy of Israel. I believe that all believing ethnic Jews, together with all believing ethnic Gentiles, will together constitute the elect, the church, “the one holy nation” in covenant with God (1 Pet. 2:9). And because they are all in Christ, the true seed of Abraham, they are all the seed of Abraham and heirs of the promise.
I don’t believe in replacement theology; I believe in inclusion theology: Gentiles have now been included in the commonwealth of Israel and are as much “true Jews” as are believing ethnic Jews. It isn’t replacement but fulfillment, just as the butterfly fulfills and completes what God intended when he first crafted a caterpillar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 26, 2023 12:49:29 GMT -5
From Rapture ready,lol
Satan and the Lie of Replacement Theology : By Geri Ungurean
Published on: May 22, 2019 by RR7 Category:General Articles, Geri Ungurean
Most of us have heard of the false teaching called Replacement Theology. This article is for those who either have never heard of it, or have had this preached to them Sunday after Sunday and just figured that it was Biblical.
I’m here to tell you – It’s a lie from the pit of hell.
Replacement Theology (RT) has been around for centuries. The term used by theologians is supersessionism. The church supersedes Israel. Theologians have cited the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD as proof that God was finished with the Jewish people.
It has always amazed me that churches who teach RT completely ignore some critically important words by the apostle Paul in Romans 11. I would HIGHLY recommend that you read all of Romans 11 (9 and 10 as well), but Romans 11 truly expresses why the Jews did not receive their Savior, and clearly shows that God is not done with His Chosen people.
“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.’
“Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all” (Romans 11:25-32).
How could this be any clearer? God ordained that a blindness in part would happen to Israel, until all of the Gentiles who were to be saved would come into His Kingdom. It also states that the gifts of and the calling of God are irrevocable.
God’s plan from the beginning was to offer salvation to the entire world. He used the Jewish people to bring His law to show His Holiness, and then through their lineage He would ultimately bring His Son to pay for all sin. What a merciful and loving God we serve!
Two types of Replacement Theology
There are two main schools of thought regarding RT:
Israel’s role as God’s Chosen was completed once Jesus came to earth (economic supersessionism).
Because of her disobedience, Israel forfeited her role as Chosen of God because of her rejection of Jesus as Messiah (punitive supersessionism).
Punitive supersessionism was clearly articulated by Martin Luther in his sermon: “On the Jews and Their Lies”:
“For such ruthless wrath of God is sufficient evidence that they [i.e., the Jewish people] assuredly have erred and gone astray. Even a child can comprehend this. For one dare not regard God as so cruel that he would punish his own people so long, so terrible, so unmercifully … Therefore this work of wrath is proof that the Jews, surely rejected by God, are no longer his people, and neither is he any longer their God.” (“On the Jews and Their Lies,” Trans. Martin H. Bertram, in Luther’s Works [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971], p. 265).
How could a man used of God as was Martin Luther come to such a conclusion about the Jews? It is written that later in his life, Luther was convinced that he was called of God to save the Jews. When his efforts failed, he became enraged. In one night, in response to his anti-Semitic sermon, synagogues were burned to the ground and over 2,000 Jews were slaughtered. Martin Luther was used by God in a mighty way in the Great Reformation, but alas he was merely a man. His teachings about Jews had a dramatic impact on the church in Germany for many years to come. Hitler was a great fan of Luther. He carried the sermon: “On the Jews and Their Lies” to every SS meeting.
RT is closely related to Reformed or Covenant Theology, which is associated with John Calvin. If you’ve noticed that your pastor does not speak or teach on eschatology (the study of End Times), it’s most likely that the leadership of your church adheres to amillennialism – view of eschatology which views End-Times prophecy as “spiritual” instead of literal. It’s a convenient way of avoiding the promises made to Israel in the Word. Since the proponents of RT believe that the church inherited the promises made to Israel, there is no need to teach that End-Times prophecy is literal. The prophecies are viewed more as allegorical.
Quote from John Calvin about the Jews:
“Their [the Jews] rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone.” – John Calvin
Satan is determined to lie and deceive mankind. He uses just a little bit of truth (Scripture) and then twists it for his purposes. He knows the Word better than any one of us. His motivation for memorizing God’s Word is to seek and destroy God’s people. He started in the Garden of Eden with Eve. He tried it against Jesus in the wilderness. Jesus always fought him (and shut him down) with pure Scripture.
God made a Covenant with Israel. I’ve read articles by Bible teachers who claim that Israel relinquished the promises made by God because of their rebellion. A present-day preacher who teaches this is John Piper – but there are certainly others. God cannot lie. He made the promises. It has nothing to do with how good or bad Israel is. It has everything to do with God, His faithfulness and Bible Prophecy!
Can you imagine if our Salvation depended upon our goodness?
“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Of course, God does expect to see good fruit from our lives after we are born again. But if we are honest with ourselves, we will confess that we sin many times a day. Remember when Jesus told us that if we even “think” sinful thoughts i.e. “lust” that it is just as if we committed the sin?
“If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us” (1 John 1:8-10).
Paul speaks of this in this passage of Scripture:
“I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin” (Romans 7:21-25). (emphasis added)
Hatred of the Jews
As a student in the synagogue I attended when I was a child, the history of my people saddened me. I learned of the persecution by the Catholic Church. I learned that no matter where we went, ultimately, we were placed in ghettos with locked gates. We were HATED. I would ponder in my mind why—what did we do to warrant such hatred and oppression? It wasn’t until I was born-again that I realized why. It was Satan all along. He placed hatred in the hearts of men and women for the Jews.
But I never thought that it would be this extreme. I’m shocked as I read the news and see the world flying the swastika flag all across the globe. It literally makes me sick. But I know that all things must happen according to His plan. It took the extermination of 6 million of my people to bring about the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel in 1948 – a prophecy that many proponents of RT did not expect.
Israel is Israel. The church is the church. In the Old Testament, Israel was under the Law. Jesus brought us the Covenant of Grace. We are FREE in Him!
“For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:17).
“Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:8-11).
Jesus was sent to earth for one reason—to die. It was His precious blood which cleansed the repentant sinner, and made him/her righteous in the eyes of the Father. Every Jew needs to come to the Father through Jesus Christ. There is no special arrangement between the Jewish people and God.
So, if you are in a church that believes that God has cast away His people—the Jews, please understand that what is being taught is not truth. Have you noticed that most of the RT denominations are vehemently anti-Israel? Are you starting to see that Satan’s plan to destroy God’s children has worked in most of the mainline churches? Here is a list of churches who believe the RT lie:
The Roman Catholic Church (Not a church, but a Cult)
Southern Baptist Convention – (depends on leadership)
The United Methodist Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
National Baptist Convention of America, Inc
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod
African Methodist Episcopal Church
The Episcopal Church
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church
United Church of Christ
Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, Joplin, Mo
Please understand that in each of these denominations, it is possible to have a pastor who is a true shepherd under the Great Shepherd Jesus. But these denominations are known to adhere to the RT lie.
These churches have declared their hatred for Israel and are supporting Hamas. This is exactly what the devil wants to happen. But our Lord, being omniscient, is using all of this to fulfill His prophetic Word concerning Israel.
“And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it” (Zechariah 12:3).
From Arutz Sheva from Israel:
“These very liberal churches include Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalians, Lutherans, and the United Church of Christ. They presently number about 16 million. Their membership and influence in the United States continue to decline. These churches’ rhetoric is usually outdone by an even harsher one of a small group of so-called ‘peace churches,’ including the Mennonites and Quakers.”
“Mainline churches claim many members from Congress. They represent America’s heartland and have adopted a range of resolutions hostile to Israel. They include calls for boycotts plus divestment and sanctions (BDS). Some are aimed at Israel; others focus on the ‘settlements.’ Several churches supported the hateful Kairos Palestine Document published in 2009 by some Palestinian Christians. There is also tourism to Israel under Palestinian auspices.
“BDS started with the passage of a resolution in 2004 at the Presbyterian Church (USA) calling for selective divestment of shares of American companies doing business in Israel. Long before that, the World Council of Churches (WCC), founded in 1948, aligned itself with ‘third world’ countries and thinking. This is an international umbrella group of mainline churches which claims denominational membership of 590 million people. It has frequently condemned Israel, yet never protested attempts by Israel’s neighbors and by terrorists to erase it from the map.
“Several of these churches also publish extremely anti-Israel educational materials. These are often the only ones members will view. The Methodists produced a study guide a few years ago authored by an apostate Jewish pastor. He admitted to hating Judaism. It featured illustrations of Israeli soldiers reminiscent of Nazi guards at a concentration camp.
“Theology is playing an increasing role in mainline churches’ anti-Israel activity. It began with the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center and its head, Dr. Naim Ateek. Many liberal churches have partnered with Sabeel. Ateek used crucifixion imagery in his Easter message of 2001: ‘It seems to many of us that Jesus is on the cross again with thousands of crucified Palestinians around him.’
“This reintroduces the ancient murderous Christian charge of deicide against the Jews. Ateek and others deny that the Bible speaks of any covenant of land with the Jews. This is a renewal of the replacement theology and supersessionism, and is extremely dangerous for Jews around the world, especially at a time of rising anti-Semitism.
“Palestinian influences in anti-Israel hate-mongering is huge. They have sent teams of Palestinian Christians around the U.S for a decade, tugging at Christian heartstrings with emotional tales of woe. They are more effective than Palestinian Muslims, who don’t come as ‘brothers.’
“Still, there are surprises. In 2012, several denominations substituted positive investment resolutions in place of divestment. In some cases, votes that looked like they were heading in the anti-Israel direction were saved by impassioned speeches by pastors who spoke about the impact such a resolution would have on Jewish-Christian friendships and partnerships in their churches.
“The actions of these mainline churches have poisoned the well of Christian-Jewish dialogue. Jews entered the dialogue, which has been fruitful at times, on the basis of assurances that Christian partners left contempt for Jews and Judaism behind, and had made serious attempts to understand what was important to Jews. The way in which these churches treat Israel shows that neither is true.” – source
I ask you this: Even if you have been in one church for years, if they are teaching a lie, would it not be the right thing to do to leave and attempt to find a gathering of brothers and sisters in Christ who believe the whole Word of God?
“I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing” (Genesis 12:3).
And a word to those seeking a place to worship:
ASK QUESTIONS. You have a right to know how leadership feels about very important issues – whether they believe the whole Word of God or choose to add or take away from God’s Holy Word.
How Can I Be Saved?
A Sermon for Sunday
Shalom b’Yeshua
MARANATHA!
Grandmageri422@gmail.com
Articles at grandmageri422.me
Article Information
Last Modified on June 12, 2019
|
|
