Featured Replacement Theolody-what is it,who teaches it-

P.S. as you can probably see or should take note their is NO "replacement" taking place in my view whatsoever. BTW, the first question was from a Cal/Det pretrib Dispy and the second from a Cal/Det postrib Dispy...

 

"mainstream Reformed" theology as regarding this is that due to isreal rejection of jesus as messiah, the kingdom promised them by God under the Old covenantwas forfeited forever by them, and were given over to the church, which is now to be seen as "spiritual isreal" correct?

That God replaced isreal proper with Spritual isreal in the new Covenant

 

I'm always open to learning and discovery of new truths. On the other hand, there are some things that are settled in my mind and have been for a long time.

 

Yep. I said that too!

 

I haven't read all the thread, only the first couple of pages.
There is a definite theology called "Replacement Theology." I believe that it is dangerous and even heretical. The Catholics believe this to some extent: that they are the One True Church, and replaced Israel. This is not true, and even Paul counters it.

There will always be Christians, believers.
There will always be Jews, Israel.
There will always be Gentiles.

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

If Paul mentions all three groups in the above verse, then how could one have replaced the other?
Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles. However he never forsook his love and desire to convert the Jews:

Romans 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

Even today, Israel is still a nation. She cannot be ignored as a nation. We send missionaries to the nation of Israel that those Israelites might be saved. When they are saved, they leave their old religion (as Paul did), and become believers. We are not all Israelites, as some here mistakenly teach. (If so what tribe are you from)?

When the Gentile becomes saved he leaves his Gentile religion behind and becomes a Christian.
When the Jew becomes saves he leaves his Jewish religion behind and becomes a Christian.
One of the major themes of Ephesians is that the Jewish believer and the Gentile believer are one in Christ. There is no more wall between them.

There is no such thing as Replacement Theology. It is a dangerous doctrine. The logical outcome of this doctrine is that Islam, someday, will replace Christianity--which they are bent on doing.

 

God always has reserved to himself a faithful remnant grom among the jewish peoples...

paul answers that God has NOT forever cast off the jewish peoples, but used theur hardness to graft gentiles into the messiah...

paul states that God will deal mainly with gentiles for now, but in the end, will deal with Jewish nation/peop[les again...

jesus answered the question by stating that the times and seasons are up to the father, peter said God WOULD have ushered in the Kingdom Age if isrel had received christ, so do not see forfeiting it here...

God promised messiah to rule from Jerusalem in messianic age, haven;t seen that yet!

Know that reformed bethren can see all of that, due to them seeing prophecy thru lens of spiritualizing/allogorizing the passages, but prefer to stick to the plain and literal meanings!

 

We need to be careful associating NT Jews with OT Israelites. More later.

(Pot stirred)

 

We tend take literally though that there will be an exyended period of time satan is bound from earth, so NO more false religions/sickness/diseases upon the earth, as Messiah will rstore paradise on earth for a time, after that time, GWT judgement of the Lost, and new heavens and new earth then, when messiah turns over his kingdom to the father!

 

This covenant theology really messes you up doesn't it?
Were the apostles Jews? Were they saved? Then were they Christians?
Are you a Gentile? A saved Gentile?
What about those people that now comprise a nation since the UN gave them that status in 1948 and dwell in that land that borders Jordan, the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and Egypt, for starters. They call themselves "The nation of Israel." Do they exist? If not who are they?
Either they exist, even as unbelievers, and Gentiles exist, even as unbelievers, or your logical conclusion would be that none exist as unbelievers and you are a universalist, believing all are saved and no one needs a Savior.
Gentiles need Christ.
Jews need Christ.
And when they come to Christ they are Christians.
Eschatology not withstanding, all three groups still exist on this earth.

 

The church then did not replace Israel.
Israelites had to become Christians, or part of the church if you will.
Today, in this dispensation, the way of salvation is only through the blood of Jesus Christ. It always was, but in the OT, they only had a foreshadowing. We can look back to the real thing. But today the Israelites must trust the same Christ we do. We don't replace them. They are still here and salvation for them is the same as for us--salvation through Christ.
Salvation has always been the same for all:
Justification by faith. It was that way for Abraham, for David, and it is for us (See Romans 4). But in no way does the church replace Israel.

 

Wow! I can not believe we agree on something!:applause:

 

Beware of Dual-New Covenant theologians...

 

Sounds good. Let's just remember that I've already self-identified as an economic supersessionist.

I think I'm understanding your question correctly when I reply: the test for salvation prior to the Cross was identification within the Israelite nation (which was available to Gentiles) and faithfulness to the covenants and God's ways.

Those who were among the OT saints achieved salvation in their lives and reside in Heaven following their lives because of the atoning power of the covenants available in Israel which is made complete in Jesus' final atonement.

The OT saints to NT saints are a seamless line of continuity of salvation from old covenants to new covenant.

I think Paul makes this case in Romans 4:9-25 as he speaks about the nature of righteousness leading to salvation in Abraham's (spiritual) descendants.

This is an important point since one of the arguments for the current political state of Israel that they are to be inheritors of God's Abrahamic Covenant. However, I would point out two things: a) the spiritual nation of Israel ceased to exist following the Babylonian captivity with the loss of all but two of the original 12 tribes of Israel, and b) Abraham's covenant didn't extend to all his children, but only his faithful children.

Faithfulness is the key to covenantal sealing.

Perhaps, but I think you need to primarily direct the conversation about the supersession of the Church over Israel via the NT. The Isaiah passage is more apt as it occurs later, the Genesis passages are problematic given their early dating. There's often too much confusion brought because of the mixing of concepts and languages.

One thing seem clear, that the Jews arose out of the consolidation of the tribe of Benjamin into Judah and then out of Judah. The other tribes had lingering identification in the early NT period, but once the New Covenant is sealed at Calvary they (at least for Christians) ceased to be unique.

This is a healthy conversation.

 

Keep in mind that theologically there are three views of supersessionism, the two you aptly mentioned and a third, structural supersessionism.

I fall into the economic supersessionist framework. There is salvation available to Jews, but it comes from Jesus and it is not tied to their ethnicity but rather their humanity. Given that Jesus doesn't see Greek or Hebrew (Gal 3:28.)

As others have posted (which is exactly what I was going to post) there is little consensus that the 144k in Revelation are ethnic Jews. It works only in a classic dispensationalist pre-trib, pre-mil eschatology. Otherwise, they are usually seen as faithful believers.

One of the challenges with this discussion is that there was a real coy move by the Jewish leadership in 1947 to call the reclaimed territory Israel. It should have been called Judah or Judea. That changed everything.

 

(emphasis mine)

I don't think these kinds of statements are helpful.

Supersessionism isn't heretical, in fact it has been the position of most major theologians and church leaders since the early days of the Church.

To say it is heretical is to abuse the term "heretical" which should only be reserved for those things which are truly false teaching and blatantly against the direct teaching of Scripture. As a supersessionist I reject such a moniker. As a theologian I challenge you to prove my positions wrong and heretical.

This is not argued well. Just because Paul uses all three groups doesn't inherently attach significance to them. Given Paul's previous discussions of Israel, along with the entire scope of NT biblical theology, we can see a more developed theology and doctrine focusing on the Church as the true Israel which has, by virtue of its establishment as the new covenantal people of God, become the chosen body wherein God provides salvation to all people through Jesus' final atonement.

Let's not forget that in Christ there is no longer ethnic identity (Gal 3:28.) The key is that Christ's salvation flows to all people and those who are saved become part of the body of Christ, the Church...not Israel.

And it is my prayer that all Jews become Christians, but they must find faith in Jesus Christ and not in their ethnicity.

There are no Israelites anymore, there are only Jews. The tribes of Israel have functionally disappeared. The trick of history is calling this land Israel instead of Judah.

I absolutely agree with you here. :thumbsup:

There is a distinct doctrinal position which we've been discussing and it is wholly important. Don't be so dismissive about it. Your "logical outcome" is a red herring. I can't believe you'd actually argue that point. There is no similarity between Islam and Christianity as it has to do with salvation. Attempting to brand a theological position this way is a poor form of argumentation.

If we take the theme of Paul from Romans, that we are to be thankful to the Jews (and before them the Israelites) for shepherding salvation until Christ we can learn that we are to be thankful for them. Our next step is to then share the Gospel with them. Jews need Jesus and can receive Him just as well as pagans and other ethnicities.

In the new covenant, Jesus is the provider of salvation and the Church is the body of believers from all ethnicities who are awaiting the consummation of the age.