Replacement theology (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine



Message


DaveW -> Replacement theology (7/29/2008 8:53:25 AM)

In a thread in Morality and Ethics CoeurdeLeon asked
quote:

Could you elaborate on that, Dave? Cause I'm pretty sure I've swallowed some replacement theology.
To have replied there would have been ot.

This seems to come around periodicly. Tried to pull up an old thread on it but the query function does not do well back farther than a year. So I started a new thread.

A good definition of RT from http://therefinersfire.org/replacement_theology.htm

What Is Replacement Theology?

Replacement Theology was introduced to the Church shortly after Gentile leadership took over from Jewish leadership. What are its premises?
1. Israel (the Jewish people and the land) has been replaced by the Christian Church in the purposes of God, or, more precisely, the Church is the historic continuation of Israel to the exclusion of the former.
2. The Jewish people are now no longer a "chosen people." In fact, they are no different from any other group, such as the English, Spanish, or Africans.
3. Apart from repentance, the new birth, and incorporation into the Church, the Jewish people have no future, no hope, and no calling in the plan of God. The same is true for every other nation and group.
4. Since Pentecost of Acts 2, the term "Israel," as found in the Bible, now refers to the Church.
5. The promises, covenants and blessings ascribed to Israel in the Bible have been taken away from the Jews and given to the Church, which has superseded them. However, the Jews are subject to the curses found in the Bible, as a result of their rejection of Christ.


Discussion?




SpongeBlog -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 10:19:58 AM)

Hi Dave (I owe you a PM, it's coming).

This topic is like the law. Two completely polarized camps effectively missing the truth between their extremist views. I believe Jesus Himself is the One obedient Jew who replaced the natural people of Israel as the 'nation' that inherits the blessings. Both Jew and Gentile alike have the obligation to abandon their old spiritual identies before the Lord and adopt their new ones found in the one new man of Jesus Christ. One new man with many members.

The problem with the one extreme that says the Jews have been replaced by the 'church' is the obvious exclusion of some literal prophecies that Jesus made in regard to His return. One problem with the other extreme is it effectively relegates the Gentiles to their continued second class status with God while requiring them to in effect conform to Jewish tradition (not at all unlike what the law did to Gentiles).

Hopefully I'll have the chance to explain more as the discussion picks up. It's deserves a lot more explanation than a few sentences. Gotta run...




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 11:38:21 AM)

So the opposite of "Replacement" theology would be what? Duality theology.

Thanks
RC




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 11:59:52 AM)

Duality theology? Explain....




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 12:34:44 PM)

Maybe I am just missing the point, but is not everyone regardless of race, origin, or history required to believe in Jesus Christ for Salvation.

If the Jews can do it one way, and everyone else another way; that would be duality.

Thanks
RC




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 12:40:24 PM)

From Rom 11 we see that Israel is NOT the church:

Rom 11:1 So I ask, "God has not rejected his people, has he?" Of course not! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham from the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom 11:2a God has not rejected his people whom he chose long ago.


To make it clear that he is NOT speaking of the church Paul says this:

Rom 11:11 And so I ask, "They have not stumbled so as to fall, have they?" Of course not! On the contrary, because of their stumbling, salvation has come to the gentiles to make the Jews jealous.
Rom 11:12 Now if their stumbling means riches for the world, and if their fall means riches for the gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!


and

Rom 11:28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved because of their ancestors.

Who is he writing to?

Rom 11:13 I am speaking to you gentiles. Because I am an apostle to the gentiles, I am glorifying my ministry.

So clearly Paul has established that there is a distinction between Jew and Gentile, and between Israel and the church.

So what about us gentiles? Where do we fit in?

Rom 11:17 Now if some of the branches have been broken off, and you, a wild olive branch, have been grafted in their place to share the rich root of the olive tree,
Rom 11:18 do not boast about being better than the other branches. If you boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.
Rom 11:19 Then you will say, "Branches were cut off so that I could be grafted in."
Rom 11:20 That's right! They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you remain only because of faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid!
Rom 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he certainly will not spare you either.
Rom 11:22 Consider, then, the kindness and severity of God: his severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness toward you-if you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you too will be cut off.
Rom 11:23 If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again, because God is able to graft them in.
Rom 11:24 After all, if you were cut off from what is naturally a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much easier it will be for these natural branches to be grafted back into their own olive tree!


I have never been around olive trees but I have been around other fruit trees that are grafted. The branch retains its native fruit but if the root stock is good may produce more and better fruit. You can have an apple tree that grows different types of apples on the same tree. One branch will grow Delicious, one Macintosh, another Jonathan, etc. We have been grafted into that tree that goes back thru the Jewish people with Moses and Abraham, and back further all the way to Adam. Are we Jews? No, but we have been grafted into their stock. From the apostle's imagery here the Jewish people grow natively on that stock and are "broken off" due to unbelief. (v17) Broken, not cut. The gentiles are cut from their tree meaning they can be grafted in anywhere. A branch that is broken off can only be grafted back into the place it was broken from.




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 12:43:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

If the Jews can do it one way, and everyone else another way; that would be duality.
No, it is only by faith in Yeshua/Jesus that those broken Jewish branches can be grafted back into their own tree.

It would seem from this imagery that it is possible that a Jewish child (born in the cultivated olive tree) that accepts Jesus at an early age would never be broken off in the first place. I don't know if you would call that a "second way," as faith in Jesus is still what keeps that child there.




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 2:19:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

If the Jews can do it one way, and everyone else another way; that would be duality.
No, it is only by faith in Yeshua/Jesus that those broken Jewish branches can be grafted back into their own tree.

It would seem from this imagery that it is possible that a Jewish child (born in the cultivated olive tree) that accepts Jesus at an early age would never be broken off in the first place. I don't know if you would call that a "second way," as faith in Jesus is still what keeps that child there.


What about a Jew that does not accept Jesus in the here and now.

Thanks
RC




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 3:02:08 PM)

The text says he/she is broken off of the tree.

I take that to mean they are lost.




CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 3:14:28 PM)

Dave, thank you very much for explaining. I have heard this replacement theology many, many times although I never knew it had a name. And something always seemed not quite right about it.

I understand your point about being grafted into something going all the way back to Adam. That makes perfect sense.

I'll be continuing to read everyone's thoughts.[:)]




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 3:23:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW

The text says he/she is broken off of the tree.

I take that to mean they are lost.


And we agree again.


Thanks
RC




Lapidoth -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 3:50:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon

Dave, thank you very much for explaining. I have heard this replacement theology many, many times although I never knew it had a name. And something always seemed not quite right about it.

I understand your point about being grafted into something going all the way back to Adam. That makes perfect sense.

I'll be continuing to read everyone's thoughts.[:)]



Ditto.
Thanks Dave.




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 4:00:35 PM)

Just one other question Dave,

Do the Jews that die lost by not believing in Jesus get a second chance in the future?

Thanks
RC




JesKlu -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 5:51:01 PM)

Hello Dave,

I am not saying the Church has replaced Israel, the Jews, in any way. But doesn't scripture talk about a new Israel somewhat?

Galatians 6:16
16And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

The Israel of God consists of both believing Jews and Gentiles. Isn't this the context Paul is talking in?

We all know what the Epistle is about and against, the Judaizers, imposing the law on the Gentiles.

I am in no way saying that the Jewish people are no longer the chosen people, because they are. But they are not saved though unless they believe in Jesus Christ.

But some believe the Jews can be saved without believing in Jesus by the fact they are the chosen people (John Hagee).

My view is also similar to Spongeblog's.

Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica




zoebob -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 6:49:17 PM)

All God's chosen npeople will accept and believe HIm. However, since Christ's coming the Jews are not by default God's chosen people: the church is. SOme Jews are his chosen people but not all or a certain number by default.




bob97 -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 8:54:02 PM)

quote:

Do the Jews that die lost by not believing in Jesus get a second chance in the future?


Scripture sure does not support a second chance...lost is lost.

______________________________________________________________

I disagree zoebob, the Jewish people are no more chosen today than the gentile, we all enter into salvation the same way. But God still has covenants to fulfill with Israel, they are promised that and that will be completed when Christ returns. But I'm afraid that there will be few left for that event... according to Zechariah only 1/3.

Bob




SpongeBlog -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 9:41:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon
...I'll be continuing to read everyone's thoughts.[:)]

Oh yeah? Then tell me what number I'm thinking of right now.




CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 9:45:56 PM)

[8D]




SpongeBlog -> RE: Replacement theology (7/29/2008 10:25:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW

From Rom 11 we see that Israel is NOT the church:

Rom 11:1 So I ask, "God has not rejected his people, has he?" Of course not! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham from the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom 11:2a God has not rejected his people whom he chose long ago.


If you mean there is a difference between natural, unregenerate Jews and Spirit-sealed believers I'd agree with you. But once a Jew gets saved does he not now become a part of God's family, God's nation, God's people, Jesus's Body, God's Church (called out ones)--the same congregation the Gentiles became a part of when they believed? It seems Paul plainly tells us there is no distinction whatsoever before God between me and a Jew who is also saved. Other than he's still Jewish as far as the flesh goes, and I'm still WASP.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
To make it clear that he is NOT speaking of the church Paul says this:

Rom 11:11 And so I ask, "They have not stumbled so as to fall, have they?" Of course not! On the contrary, because of their stumbling, salvation has come to the gentiles to make the Jews jealous.
Rom 11:12 Now if their stumbling means riches for the world, and if their fall means riches for the gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!


I see fleshly distinction here, not spiritual.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
and

Rom 11:28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved because of their ancestors.

Again, I see natural distinction, not spiritual.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
Who is he writing to?

Rom 11:13 I am speaking to you gentiles. Because I am an apostle to the gentiles, I am glorifying my ministry.

So clearly Paul has established that there is a distinction between Jew and Gentile, and between Israel and the church.

But only in the flesh--natural lineage. He has elsewhere firmly established the non-distinction between us spiritually. And differences as far as Israel and the church, he seems to speak generally in the context of the natural, unsaved nation of natural Jews, not born-again Jews.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
So what about us gentiles? Where do we fit in?

Rom 11:17 Now if some of the branches have been broken off, and you, a wild olive branch, have been grafted in their place to share the rich root of the olive tree,
Rom 11:18 do not boast about being better than the other branches. If you boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.
Rom 11:19 Then you will say, "Branches were cut off so that I could be grafted in."
Rom 11:20 That's right! They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you remain only because of faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid!
Rom 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he certainly will not spare you either.
Rom 11:22 Consider, then, the kindness and severity of God: his severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness toward you-if you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you too will be cut off.
Rom 11:23 If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again, because God is able to graft them in.
Rom 11:24 After all, if you were cut off from what is naturally a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much easier it will be for these natural branches to be grafted back into their own olive tree!


I guess the question is, "what", or "Who" is the root? One camp says, the nation composed of Israel's people. Another camp says, God Himself. To stay in tune with Paul's teaching about the 'one new man'--a man composed from two formerly different and distinct men but who are now one new man--and to stay within the boundaries of the grafting analogy, I believe the Root is God from whom the life sap comes. But if you understand 'root' as being the system through which Jews have related to God, and the nation itself, then you see the root as being Israel.



quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
The branch retains its native fruit but if the root stock is good may produce more and better fruit. You can have an apple tree that grows different types of apples on the same tree. One branch will grow Delicious, one Macintosh, another Jonathan, etc. We have been grafted into that tree that goes back thru the Jewish people with Moses and Abraham, and back further all the way to Adam. Are we Jews? No, but we have been grafted into their stock. From the apostle's imagery here the Jewish people grow natively on that stock and are "broken off" due to unbelief. (v17) Broken, not cut. The gentiles are cut from their tree meaning they can be grafted in anywhere. A branch that is broken off can only be grafted back into the place it was broken from.


The imagery is very powerful, indeed. But is it possible or customary to graft another branch into another branch, or must it be grafted into the trunk? I think the illustration is that both kinds of branches are grafted into the same trunk, fed by the same life giving root system--God Himself. Some branches are native to that trunk, having originally been a part of that trunk/ root through the old covenant, but now broken off because of unbelief. We Gentiles were never a part of the trunk/ root to begin with, yet by believing are grafted into the trunk alongside the remaining natural branches and also bear the fruit of the life giving sap that comes from the root just as the natural branches that remain do.




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 8:28:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: zoebob

However, since Christ's coming the Jews are not by default God's chosen people: the church is. Some Jews are his chosen people but not all or a certain number by default.
That is not what Rom 11 teaches. God's call on the physical decendants of Jacob and the covenantal requirements for Israel to be a light to the world, to bring the truth of the God of Abraham to all nations ARE STILL IN EFFECT. "The gifts and callings of God are without repentance." God has never retracted any of that from that nationality.

HOWEVER, as gentile believers we get to participate in it. We are grafted in. We become a part of what is termed in Galatians as the "Commonwealth of Israel."

By default they ARE still chosen by God. Re-read Romans 11 very carefully.




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 8:35:56 AM)

Spongeblog wrote:
quote:

I see fleshly distinction here, not spiritual.
*****
Again, I see natural distinction, not spiritual.
******
But only in the flesh--natural lineage. He has elsewhere firmly established the non-distinction between us spiritually. And differences as far as Israel and the church, he seems to speak generally in the context of the natural, unsaved nation of natural Jews, not born-again Jews.
You are looking at this from too western a perspective. Jewish perspective does not seperate physical and spiritual like that. Greek gnosticism does. Paul wrote from a Jewish perspective.

There is a very real and ongoing call and requirement BY GOD on the physical people of Israel. That is not lost under the new covenant, which if you read where it is spoken of in the OT, is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 8:47:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW

Spongeblog wrote:
quote:

I see fleshly distinction here, not spiritual.
*****
Again, I see natural distinction, not spiritual.
******
But only in the flesh--natural lineage. He has elsewhere firmly established the non-distinction between us spiritually. And differences as far as Israel and the church, he seems to speak generally in the context of the natural, unsaved nation of natural Jews, not born-again Jews.
You are looking at this from too western a perspective. Jewish perspective does not seperate physical and spiritual like that. Greek gnosticism does. Paul wrote from a Jewish perspective.

There is a very real and ongoing call and requirement BY GOD on the physical people of Israel. That is not lost under the new covenant, which if you read where it is spoken of in the OT, is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.


Dave, I think you missed this question;

quote:

Do the Jews that die lost by not believing in Jesus get a second chance in the future?


Somewhere I heard that the Jews who reject Christ now get a second chance after their ressurection to accept Him. What say you?

Thanks
RC




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 11:53:05 AM)

A second chance? I see no scriptural authorization to take such a stance. God is soverign and will do what He will do, and if that means a 2nd chance, sobeit. But the way I read it "It is appointed unto man once to die and after that is the judgement."

I don't see second chances in that.




rcjames -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 12:44:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW

A second chance? I see no scriptural authorization to take such a stance. God is soverign and will do what He will do, and if that means a 2nd chance, sobeit. But the way I read it "It is appointed unto man once to die and after that is the judgement."

I don't see second chances in that.


And again we agee.

And I find folks that say this Scripture says this verse proves that Jews do not have to believe in Christ to be saved;


(Rom 11:26) And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob
:


So please some help from a Nessianic Jew on this;

Thsnks
RC




DaveW -> RE: Replacement theology (7/30/2008 1:18:05 PM)

It boils down to the intrepretation of "All.." Thruought the bible Israel sinnd and fell away. Yet God brought them back, sometimes starting with only a small remnant. Everyone over the age of 20 (except 2) that came out of Egypt died in the wilderness yet all Israel entered the promised land. God told Elijah that HE had preserved a few thousand from the wiles of baals.

"All Israel" has to be understood in those terms. God will remove the blinders and they will mourn over their rejection of HIM. There will be a massive repentance and as it says in Rom 11, their restoration will be "Life from the dead" to the whole world.

However I do not think that every individual who does not repent can be included in "all."




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI