Replacement theology:

[Atonement]

This subject came from another thread, but I did not want to hijack that thread so I wanted to create another thread because I had some questions on this subject.

Okay replacement theology as I understand it, means that the Church replaced Israel. God made a Covent with Abraham which would be Israel in later years. I thought the Covent made with Abraham would be fulfilled by the Church? I don't know if I fully understand this, Javier, Vic or anyone with knowledge about this topic please explain this in detail so therefore some of us are not confused. Thanks

 

[jgredline]

This is going to be a pretty long but exciting discussion...
In a nutshell...and it has been years since I have looked at this, so if my mind fails me, please correct me....

Replacement Theology teaches that the church has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people.....In other words, the folks who teach this say that the Jews are no longer Gods chosen people....

There are allot of problems with this...I don't even know where to start...One of the main things we need to do is to rightly divide the word of God for what is meant for Israel and what is meant for the Church...For example...Romans 9-11 is meant for Israel...The book of Hebrews is meant for Israel, some of the book of James is meant for Israel....
There is a real danger in applying promises that were meant for Israel to the church....


Ok, for one through out the NT we see distinctions between the Church and Israel....''IF'' we accept that the church replaced Isreal, then this would mean that the church would be subject to the curses that were meant for israel....This would mean that we would need to live and keep the law as well...This goes against the new covenant...

Now replacement theology is taught by folks who don't believe in a rapture....Why??? Because the rapture throws a monkey wrench into everything...See it is after the church is raptured that Gods promises to the jews will be completed and fulfilled...This can't happen while the church is still here....God is not man that he should lie and he has made a covenant with Abraham, then it must be fulfilled....Basically the rapture will end the time of the gentile and enter the time of the jews...They will reighn with Christ for a 1000 years and I believe literal along with the Church with Jerusalem as the capital...

This should get us started.....

 

[Guest]

How do you view "chosen people"?

It would appear that Israel was 'chosen' for a specific responsibility - namely to be a witness for God to the nations that surrounded Israel.

Rather than 'replacing' Israel - could the church be the fulfillment of promises? Or perhaps a continutation of Israel?

 

[mondar]

How do you view "chosen people"?

It would appear that Israel was 'chosen' for a specific responsibility - namely to be a witness for God to the nations that surrounded Israel.

Rather than 'replacing' Israel - could the church be the fulfillment of promises? Or perhaps a continutation of Israel?

There is a sense in which what you say is true. There is a relationship between the Church and Israel. This relationship between the Church and Israel is seen in the fact that the New Covenant was definately promised to Israel. Then in books like Hebrews, 1 Cor, 2 Cor, we find the Church functioning under these promises and covenants.

On the other hand, the land promises given to Israel seem completely unrelated to the Church. There are other issues with the Davidic Covenant. Many point to Acts two to say that Christ is now the Davidic Messiah. Charles Ryrie in his most recent edition of Dispensationalism (formerly Dispensationalism Today) has correctly noticed that Acts 2 is not about the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant, but Acts 2 is about the identification of Jesus as the "son of David."

I once read a comment in BiblioTheca Sacra (the DTS theology journel-- I forget what article) in which the writer made the statement that "God can always do more then he promised, but he can never do less." This opened my understanding of the relationship between the Church and Israel. The promises of the Covenants were made to Israel and to Israel they will be fulfilled. This does not mean that God cannot give grace to gentiles, or the Church. We do received the blessings of the New Covenant. Many of us in protestant traditions recognize this in a ceremony called "Communion." The preacher stands before the congregation and says "this cup is the New Covenant in my blood, do this in rememberance of me." When the Church receives these blessings, it is not a "fulfillment." God can always superabound in grace, and do more then he promised. Yet, he will fulfill the promises as promised. The promises were made to Israel.

Among my more Reformed brethren, this raises a question. Will God give his promises of salvation to a genetic group and not the elect? This is the whole point of Romans 9:6ff. When Israel receives its covenants and promises, that will be a time when all Israel will be saved Israel. I want to mention that even then, while all Israel is saved, the promises of God will also go the the Gentiles. Isa 19 talks about the kingdom and how the Egyptians are a people of God, the Assyrians are the work of his hands.

God can always do more then the promises he makes in the word of God. His grace is never limited by the promises. His grace can always superabound beyond the promises. But he can never do less. This concept is important, because it recognizes the distinctions between the Church and Israel. To Israel the promises belong, and will be fulfilled. The Church is something different from Israel in that the Church is Gods grace superabounding. We are receiving blessings that we were never promised.

 

[lovely]

Mondar,

I think my post would have looked similar to aLone's. I appreciate your post, and am going to look into this matter more fully. The one thing I wanted you to clear up for me is this...

Among my more Reformed brethren, this raises a question. Will God give his promises of salvation to a genetic group and not the elect? This is the whole point of Romans 9:6ff. When Israel receives its covenants and promises, that will be a time when all Israel will be saved Israel. I want to mention that even then, while all Israel is saved, the promises of God will also go the the Gentiles. Isa 19 talks about the kingdom and how the Egyptians are a people of God, the Assyrians are the work of his hands.

Are you saying that all of Israel will be saved, and that the gentiles are an extra Israel? I guess I am thinking that it contradicts the idea that one must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. How do you reconcile the two? The Lord bless you.

 

[jgredline]

Mondar
Your post is pretty good..I agree with most it...

Lovely..While I can't speak for mondar, when Paul writes that all Israel will be saved, he is speaking of the ''state'' of israel, not individuals...Just like the Gentiles, there is only one way for the Jews to inherit the kingdom of God and that is through Jesus Christ...

This is also where extreme despensationalism gets dangerous....There is another group that has come from this that does say ''all'' individual Jews will be saved, but the bible does not teach this...Paul says if it were up to him, he would be accursed for the salvation of his brethren.. (my paraphrase)...

 

[thessalonian]

Christ is the fullfillment of the Old Covenant. The promise is fullfilled in those Jews who have accepted Christ, (i.e. the Apostles and all Jews throughout the ages) of which the Church has been grafted on to the promise rather than replaced it. Near the end of time, in the great tribulation, all of Israel will come to know Jesus is the messiah. Every knee shall bend.

Catholicism does not hold replacement theology as many charge.

 

[mondar]

Mondar said:
Among my more Reformed brethren, this raises a question. Will God give his promises of salvation to a genetic group and not the elect? This is the whole point of Romans 9:6ff. When Israel receives its covenants and promises, that will be a time when all Israel will be saved Israel. I want to mention that even then, while all Israel is saved, the promises of God will also go the the Gentiles. Isa 19 talks about the kingdom and how the Egyptians are a people of God, the Assyrians are the work of his hands.
________________________________________________________________

Are you saying that all of Israel will be saved, and that the gentiles are an extra Israel? I guess I am thinking that it contradicts the idea that one must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. How do you reconcile the two? The Lord bless you.

I dont think my words are the very clear. I expected people to understand way too much theology from such a small amount of words. We have a good bit of confusion here. I will make a few more comments and maybe we can unravel this knotty bit of confusion. I hope my comments will not add to the confusion. I am not sure of what your question is asking, but here comes my comments anyway.

When I say all Israel will be saved, I am not saying no Gentiles will be saved. The problem some might have is the concept that Gentiles salvation was not part of the covenants given to Israel. If God covenants to save Israel, and fulfills his word, but also saves Gentiles; does this break his word? I dont see that it does. God must save Israel, but this does not mean he cannot save gentiles. This means there is a difference, but also similarities. Everyone is saved by faith, but some are promised this salvation, others are saved by faith without OT promises. Is there some rule that God cannot save anyone until he promises to save them? He saves all the same way, but some he promises to save and others he does not promise to save them but saves them anyway. God does not break his word if he does more then he promised. He breaks his word only if he does less. He promised that all Israel will be saved, and so they will all be saved. Throughout history this promise has not been fulfilled. Rather the current condition of Israel is like what Romans 9:6 says "They are not all Israel who are of Israel." In other words in our day there remains an unbelieving genetic Israel. There is also a remnant, or a believing genetic Israel. The day will come when there will be no unbelieving genetic, but they will be removed in Jacobs trouble (the tribulation). After this there will only be a believing genetic Israel. That is the day when all Israel will be saved and the covenants are being fulfilled. This does not mean that there are two kinds of salvation, it is always by faith in Christ. It does mean that only Israel is promised this salvation, but Gods grace superabounded and the Church and other Gentiles received salvation in spite of not being promised this salvation.

Hope this helps. The above concept is important because many Reformed brethren completely misunderstand what dispensationalists like me are saying. Dispensationalists get accused of believing in two separate kinds of salvation. That is not the question, it is one salvation. The question is can God promise to bring one entire race to salvation (and then fulfill his promise to Israel), and also bring many others not in that race to the same salvation (even though not promised to them)?

The reformed presupposition that accuses dispensationalists of two kinds of salvation is incorrect. It is not two kinds of salvation, but one salvation with two kinds of people.

 

[lovely]

Javier, Thess, and Mondar...thanks to you all for taking the time to respond. As one who still remains unconvinced in my own mind, and unable to get on board completely with any of the categories that make up the different sides of the debates concerning endtimes/replacement theology, I am always interested to hear what others believe about Scripture in this matter. I have been sort of patchworking notes from all sides for future reference.

I see more clearly what you were saying Mondar, and there was nothing wrong about your post...but I just wanted to make sure I understood it clearly. You did answer my question, and I think you are making a very good, and interesting, point. I am going to save this up for when I am able to study it more in Scripture. Currently I am still caught up in a study of the Holy Spirit...since January now...but I plan to take on the end times next. The Lord bless you...all of you.

 

[jgredline]

I dont think my words are the very clear. I expected people to understand way too much theology from such a small amount of words. We have a good bit of confusion here. I will make a few more comments and maybe we can unravel this knotty bit of confusion. I hope my comments will not add to the confusion. I am not sure of what your question is asking, but here comes my comments anyway.

...This is why I said, I don't even know where to start...It is a very difficult concept to teach on a forum....but lets give it a go..

When I say all Israel will be saved, I am not saying no Gentiles will be saved. The problem some might have is the concept that Gentiles salvation was not part of the covenants given to Israel. If God covenants to save Israel, and fulfills his word, but also saves Gentiles; does this break his word? I dont see that it does. God must save Israel, but this does not mean he cannot save gentiles. This means there is a difference, but also similarities. Everyone is saved by faith, but some are promised this salvation, others are saved by faith without OT promises. Is there some rule that God cannot save anyone until he promises to save them? He saves all the same way, but some he promises to save and others he does not promise to save them but saves them anyway. God does not break his word if he does more then he promised. He breaks his word only if he does less. He promised that all Israel will be saved, and so they will all be saved. Throughout history this promise has not been fulfilled. Rather the current condition of Israel is like what Romans 9:6 says "They are not all Israel who are of Israel." In other words in our day there remains an unbelieving genetic Israel. There is also a remnant, or a believing genetic Israel. The day will come when there will be no unbelieving genetic, but they will be removed in Jacobs trouble (the tribulation). After this there will only be a believing genetic Israel. That is the day when all Israel will be saved and the covenants are being fulfilled. This does not mean that there are two kinds of salvation, it is always by faith in Christ. It does mean that only Israel is promised this salvation, but Gods grace superabounded and the Church and other Gentiles received salvation in spite of not being promised this salvation.

Mondar...It sounds as though you are saying all individuals will be saved...Can you clarify?

Hope this helps. The above concept is important because many Reformed brethren completely misunderstand what dispensationalists like me are saying. Dispensationalists get accused of believing in two separate kinds of salvation. That is not the question, it is one salvation. The question is can God promise to bring one entire race to salvation (and then fulfill his promise to Israel), and also bring many others not in that race to the same salvation (even though not promised to them)?

The reformed presupposition that accuses dispensationalists of two kinds of salvation is incorrect. It is not two kinds of salvation, but one salvation with two kinds of people.

I understood what you were saying, this is why i Used ''extreme dispensationalist''...

 

[jgredline]

Christ is the fullfillment of the Old Covenant. The promise is fullfilled in those Jews who have accepted Christ, (i.e. the Apostles and all Jews throughout the ages) of which the Church has been grafted on to the promise rather than replaced it. Near the end of time, in the great tribulation, all of Israel will come to know Jesus is the messiah. Every knee shall bend.

I agree..

 

[mondar]

Mondar...It sounds as though you are saying all individuals will be saved...Can you clarify?

The day that Christ returns and sets up the kingdom, all individuals will be judged and only believers enter the kingdom. So at the heginning of the kingdom, there are no unbelievers and all individuals will be saved. Do not confuse this with universalist doctrine. Many individuals in the tribulation will be unbelievers, but they will all be judged and only the elect enter the kingdom.

 

[jgredline]

The day that Christ returns and sets up the kingdom, all individuals will be judged and only believers enter the kingdom. So at the heginning of the kingdom, there are no unbelievers and all individuals will be saved. Do not confuse this with universalist doctrine. Many individuals in the tribulation will be unbelievers, but they will all be judged and only the elect enter the kingdom.

OK...I have studied and looked at this view before...Many in my circles hold to this....I have no problems with it...

 

[golfjack]

reply

The concept of replacement thelogy is popular in America's churches. Replacement thelogy means that Israel failed, and God has replaced Israel with the church. This is simply not true. I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not. For I am also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the triibe of Benjamin ( Rom. 11:1).

Twice in Romans 11 Paul says that Israel has not fallen and is still the apple of God's eyye ( Rom. 11:1, 111). In the New Testamment, the word Israel is used 74 times. Clearly, in seventy-one of those references it speaks of the nation of Israel. It does not refer to the church.

Has God cast away Israel? No way. The fact is, when something is cast away, you never hear of it again. Yet in the Book of Revelation, 12 tribes of Israel, and 12 thousannd out of each of the 12 tribes, are sealed to present the gospel during the Great Tribulation ( Rev. 7:4).

We need to know that during the Great Tribulation the Gentile chuirch is in heaven. The 144,000 who will be sealed to present the gospel to world will be 144,000 Jewish people who have a super-natural revelation of the identity of Jesuus Christ as Messiah, similar to Paul's revelatioin on the road to Damascus. During this time the nation called Israell is alive and well. They will be part of the first matter of business when Christ returns to earth, the judgment of the nations. And the basis for this judgment is to be how the nations of the world treated the Jewish people and the nation of Israel. ( see Matt. 25:31-46).

Israel has been given an earthly kingdom with an earthly Jerusalem now located in Israel. The church has been given the New Jerusalem located in heaven.

The only way anyone can confuse the obvious meaning of Scripture is to spiritualize the text with an allegorical meaning than a factual meaning.


May God bless, Golfjack

 

[jgredline]

Re: reply

The concept of replacement thelogy is popular in America's churches. Replacement thelogy means that Israel failed, and God has replaced Israel with the church. This is simply not true. I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not. For I am also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the triibe of Benjamin ( Rom. 11:1).

Twice in Romans 11 Paul says that Israel has not fallen and is still the apple of God's eyye ( Rom. 11:1, 111). In the New Testamment, the word Israel is used 74 times. Clearly, in seventy-one of those references it speaks of the nation of Israel. It does not refer to the church.

Has God cast away Israel? No way. The fact is, when something is cast away, you never hear of it again. Yet in the Book of Revelation, 12 tribes of Israel, and 12 thousannd out of each of the 12 tribes, are sealed to present the gospel during the Great Tribulation ( Rev. 7:4).

We need to know that during the Great Tribulation the Gentile chuirch is in heaven. The 144,000 who will be sealed to present the gospel to world will be 144,000 Jewish people who have a super-natural revelation of the identity of Jesuus Christ as Messiah, similar to Paul's revelatioin on the road to Damascus. During this time the nation called Israell is alive and well. They will be part of the first matter of business when Christ returns to earth, the judgment of the nations. And the basis for this judgment is to be how the nations of the world treated the Jewish people and the nation of Israel. ( see Matt. 25:31-46).

Israel has been given an earthly kingdom with an earthly Jerusalem now located in Israel. The church has been given the New Jerusalem located in heaven.

The only way anyone can confuse the obvious meaning of Scripture is to spiritualize the text with an allegorical meaning than a factual meaning.


May God bless, Golfjack

A very good post and goes well with what I have been saying...

 

[Vic C.]

Good post overall, jack, except:

Has God cast away Israel? No way. The fact is, when something is cast away, you never hear of it again. Yet in the Book of Revelation, 12 tribes of Israel, and 12 thousannd out of each of the 12 tribes, are sealed to present the gospel during the Great Tribulation ( Rev. 7:4).

For starters, Dan is not mentioned. ;-)

All of "Israel" will not be saved. All throughout the OT, there is word of a remnant. Lets ponder over who this remnant might be. My studies tell me about 1/3 of all of "Israel" will be this remnant.

 

[Vic C.]

click here ---> Replacement Theology

 

[jgredline]

Good post overall, jack, except:



For starters, Dan is not mentioned. ;-)

All of "Israel" will not be saved. All throughout the OT, there is word of a remnant. Lets ponder over who this remnant might be. My studies tell me about 1/3 of all of "Israel" will be this remnant.

Yes and those folks will be kicking it in Petra if I am not mistaken... 8-)

 

[jgredline]

click here ---> Replacement Theology

I tend to stay away from Googling things, because there are too many opinions and unless one spends allot of time in a particular site, you could come out more confused.

 

[Vic C.]

I tend to stay away from Googling things, because there are too many opinions and unless one spends allot of time in a particular site, you could come out more confused.

Did you look at the link? It's from Deception in the Church. They just use the Google engine to search their site.