Replacement theology redux

The important elements of the Abrahamic Covenant demand a future fulfillment with Messiah’s kingdom rule.

(1) Israel as a nation will possess the land. Numerous Old Testament passages anticipate the future blessing of Israel and her possession of the land as promised to Abraham. Ezekiel envisions a future day when Israel is restored to the land (Ezek. 20:33–37, 40–42; 36:1–37:28).

(2) Israel as a nation will be converted, forgiven, and restored (Rom. 11:25–27).

(3) Israel will repent and receive the forgiveness of God in the future (Zech. 12:10–14).

The Abrahamic Covenant finds its ultimate fulfillment in connection with the return of Messiah to rescue and bless His people Israel. It is through the nation Israel that God promised in Genesis 12:1–3 to bless the nations of the world. That ultimate blessing will issue in the forgiveness of sins and Messiah’s glorious kingdom reign on earth. (The Moody handbook of theology)

Rob

 

You probably wouldn't if you were trying to reinforce your point of view.

But that doesn't change the theme.

 

Ransom, you are accurate in your assessment. The specific promises to Abraham's physical descendants have been fulfilled. But I think many are confused because they know that those promises contained something greater than what we see fulfilled in Joshua's/David's/Solomon's time.

Thankfully, Paul addresses that issue in Romans 4. The greater aspect of the promises to Abraham are fulfilled in all who follow the faith of Abraham:

Romans 4:
Blessed is the man whom the Lord will by no means charge with sin." Is this blessing then pronounced on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. How then was it counted? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. He received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might also be accounted to them. The father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision. For the promise to Abraham and to his seed that he should be heir of the world wasn't through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of no effect.

So we (all believers) are heirs of the world (of which the land was only a type) promised to Abraham through Christ.

 

Hey Ransom, according to your first post this wasn’t a dispensational thread but a thread on whether all Abraham’s promises were fulfilled.
I wasn’t ignoring your excellent verses in support of a fulfillment of the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant.
It’s interesting that you quoted Nehemiah 9:8;

Here God is proclaimed as the One who accomplishes or fulfills His promises. It is later contrasted with the Israelites who are unfaithful and stubborn. Read on…

God’s faithfulness is contrasted to Israel’s unfaithfulness. AND DESPITE THAT, God is still faithful!
You jabbed,

It is not God who “unfulfilled” the promise but Israel.

Earlier you asked:

My answer, because they said there was more to be fulfilled. Argue with Ezekiel and Zechariah, not me!

Rob

 

If the Bible only consisted of Genesis, then the arguement would be able to stand. But (last time I checked) it didn't.

I do not disagree that those promises were literally fulfilled in Genesis, but these same promises extended beyond Genesis's time frame, and continue on into the present, as far as Israel is concerned.

I have never gotten where people want to replace Abraham's physical descendents with his spiritual ones. I am a Christian who was born a Gentile. I am not a Jew, and have no stake in those promises made to the nation of Israel. True, many promises were of a general nature and do apply to us Gentiles, but those promises made to the nation of Israel are theirs, and theirs alone.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Gal 3:29 says If you are in Christ you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.

Are you of Abrahams seed? Is it physical or spiritual?

Read Romans 9:6-8 and tell me who is the seed of Abraham.

Jesus tells us in Rev 2:9 and Rev 3:8 that those who are physical Jews are NOT Jews.

The Jews of the New Covenant are spiritual not physical. The promises made to Old Covenant Jews are fulfilled in New Covenant Jews.

God is not going back to the shadow. He is done with the Old Covenant.

So I ask you, are you a Jew? Are you of the seed of Abraham?

 

Hebrews 11:13 & 39-40(NIV)

"13All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth...

39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect."

I have seen much arguing on this thread about the promises to Abraham. This is long used tactic of Dispensationalists teachers.

The problem is that you are going to the begining of the story(Old Testament) to reinterpret what you have been clearly told in the end(New Testament).

It like reading a large novel. In the begining the author slowly reveals things and you think you know what is going on. Then in the end of the novel he turns you upside down and ends in a way you never thought possible.

The Dispensationalist, does not like how the story ends in the New Testament, so he goes back to Old Testament to reinterpret the clear ending of the New Testament.

Dispensationalist teachers take what is clearly told us in the New Testament, that there is no difference between the Jew and Gentile spiritually and in Christ, and then try and rebuild the wall of separation.

They try and make promises unfulfilled to create a rift so they can try and separate physical spiritual jews from physical gentile spiritual jews which is what we are. That is one technique, instead of accepting the New Testaments clear chronology of the end times in passages like Matthew 24 and Revelation 19-21, they reinterpret them with Old Testament passages where God was revealing things from a "distance".

We have all the answers the Old Testament Saints were looking for in the New Testament. Dispensationalists have only to accept them.

IFBReformer

 

IFB,

A separate future plan for Jews and Gentiles is one of the fundamental building blocks of dispensationalism.

As you point out, too bad it has no NT basis.

Tim

 

HI there, I dont log on often, but wanted to add my two bits worth here. The Old
Testament can be seen as a love story between God and Israel. Deut 7:7-8. God loves
Israel and His promises to them are expressions of that love. Had all of Gods promises
to Israel been fulfilled in Joshua, why are they mentioned as still valid and still
therefore needing to be fulfilled in later books of the Bible? (Eg Nehemiah 1:8-9)
Deuteronomy 30 1-6. Psalm 105 8-11 show God’s promise was an everlasting one, that is, while it could be
realized in one generation, it could not be exhausted by one generation. God
continues to engage Israel, to plead with them to repent, to promise blessings and
restoration etc. As to the love story, read Exiekiel 16, Hosea etc. God loves Israel, He
yearns to do them good.
In the New Testament, we also find this. Luke 16-17, 1:32, 1:54-55, 1:68-75. Luke
2:32 again has God blessing both Gentiles and His people Israel. Romans 9 defines
Israel as having been given the patriarchs, the Law and the covenants, and also
describes them as, at present, largely unsaved (hence Paul’s unceasing anguish, and
Romans 10:1). He likewise reads the OT prophesies of restoration as pertaining to
Israel in Romans 9:27-29. Romans 11 states of this disbelieving Israel that they are
not rejected by God. Speaking of this Israel, Paul defines them in 11:28 as “enemies
of the Gospel”. Now, are the church enemies of the Gospel? Has the church
experienced a hardening in part till the full number of the Gentiles come in? No. It is
Israel who has been hardened (vs25) and who is presently an enemy of the Gospel (vs
28) of whom, in between these verses, Paul writes “and so all Israel shall be
saved”.
Now, I happen to be an ex-gentile, now a new creation in Christ, so what does all this
have to do with me? Given that all things were written for our instruction, and given
the place of Romans 9-11 (directly after Romans 8), I would suggest the following.
In God’s love for Israel, we can rejoice in it for its own sake (Israel are real people
and God’s love for them is a real love), and because of that, we can also discover
much about the nature of God’s love, and therefore, the nature of His love for us. Like
Israel (Deut 7:7-8) God didn’t choose me because of my abilities, but simply because
He loved me. Here is grace! (Imagine if my wife had married me for my money or
looks or whatever - no security, as she will be constantly meeting wealthier and better
looking guys - but if her choice of me was based in her love, then she can meet all the
rich handsome guys around, I’m secure because she married me because she loves
me.) Now, I sin, I fail and I let God down. Will God cast me aside and look for
someone better, or, in love, will He never give up on me, love me even when I dont
love him, be faithful even when I am not, and persevere and finally bring me home?
The character of his love for Israel says that He will. his love, not my sin, is the
greatest force in the universe. How does Romans 8 end? What can separate us from
the love of God? ... No, ... nothing can separate us from the love of God that is in
Christ Jesus our Lord!! Great theoretical point, but immediately, Paul cries out for
Israel. Why? Because they represent the greatest challenge to his theory. Israel were
in God’s love, they had His blessings, but now they are cast off, they killed Jesus, God
loves the church now etc., they prove Romans 8 is wrong. But what does Paul do? He
shows how Gods love to them continues, that his love is greater than our weakness,
and that “all Israel shall be saved”. Hence his hymn of praise in Romans 11:33-36.
The worst case against Romans 8 has been shown to declare the unbelievable truth of
it, to declare the unimagined depths and riches of His love.
THIS is the God who loves ME! And I think its great! When I fail and let God down, I
repent and pray, hoping He wont finally cast me off as a useless deal, and then I
remember that He hasn’t cast off Israel, and take courage.
I wouldn’t want God to be a divorcee! No security for me if He is! But, like Paul who
gloried in being chief of sinners, as he could use his testimony to help save others
(sinner: “I’m too sinful for God to forgive, its OK for the others, but I’m too sinful” -
Paul: “Let me let you about Stephan... and yet God forgave me! You think you are far
from God? Look way behind you, thats where I was, and by His grace, He saved me,
so your fine”), so Israel are monuments to His grace.
I love Jesus, and so am delighted that Israel, his brethren of the flesh, will be saved
(see Genesis 45:16). I dont feel jealous or threatened, but on the contrary, affirmed
and secure. Equally, I delight to know that my God is faithful, and will indeed keep
me and present me spotless before the presence of His glory (Jude 1:24). He has
indeed loved us with an everlasting love.
Hope this helps you see another take on the issues you raised, God bless, Colin

 

Colin,

Paul's point about national Israel in Romans is that they had come to a fork in the road in Paul's generation. Their choice--Believe in Christ and inherit the full measure of His promises (emphasizing the spiritual rewards of the New Covenant), or reject Him and feel the full weight of His curses.

The phrase about "all Israel shall be saved" simply must be put into it's proper context--otherwise Paul was teaching regeneration on the basis of nationality, an idea totally inconsistent with other N.T. teaching. It's always been about a remnant, not the whole. History itself makes that obvious, biblical and beyond. Check the context of Romans 11, the emphasis is on how they are saved, not on how many. "All" as used in scripture rarely means what we often assume it to mean (remember "all the world should be taxed" as one example).

In Christ,

Tim

 

No, that is precisely what Paul was teaching, and it is not foreign to N.T. teaching at all. ALL the nation of Israel (that is the remnant living when Christ comes) shall be saved. They as a nation will turn to the Christ, the same Christ which they as a nation once rejected. We don't have to change the meanings of the words to force them into our own theology.

You are right--the whole remnant to be exact. God promised "for David's sake," that He would preserve a remnant. The promises did not stop with Abraham. They also were with David. You need to read farther than just the Book of Genesis. Many times does the Lord say "For David's sake." Some day our coming King will sit on the throne of David, and reign for a thousand years. It will be on this earth.

The emphasis is on both. How many--all: the entire nation shall be saved. That is the entire remnant that is alive near the end of the Tribulation Period when Christ comes again. How they are saved? "They shall look on him whom they have pierced."
Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
That God is Jesus Christ. They will recognize that in that day. For Christ alone can save.
DHK

 

Hi Tim,
The question of how Israel shall be saved is a good one. Clearly, salvation by nationality is out. Israel's history does however contain group choices/events.

Zechariah 12 -13:1 contains the clearest account of Israel's future salvation.
12:10 "They [plural] will look on him whom they have pierced" - Conviction of sin
"and mourn for him" repentance
"each clan by itself" each individual feels the weight of what is happening
"On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to cleanse them from sin" baptism.

So how are Israel saved? By nationality or by conviction of sin, repentance and baptism [just like you and I]? That is, as a nation called to proclaim the way of salvation to the world, their whole history declares that

1) by ourselves, we cant make it. Given every help (the Law, David, the prophets etc) we sinned and failed.
2) the wages of sin is death, and we have had a living death for the past 2,000 years.
3)BUT, praise God, thats not the end of the story! The free gift of God is eternal life.

As a nation of priests, their whole history proclaims the Gospel. Indeed, the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable! John 19:33-36 shows how the crucifixion is the beginning, center and climax of Israel's national history. They became a nation in the Exodus, and, finnaly, they shall indeed look on him who they have pierced.

Think of Joseph. Called by God to lead his brothers, they despised and rejected him, and believed him dead. Meantime, Joseph becomes a ruler over the Egyptians. But that is not the end of the story. Driven by famine (Romans 11 says we should make the Jewish people jealous of the riches we have in Christ) the brothers go to Egypt seeking food. Joseph doesn't say, Ive rejected you, the Egyptians are my people now. He waits till Judah offers his own life for Benjamin's, and then sends out the interpreter and reveals himself as their long lost brother whom they thought they had killed. Presented with a gentile ruler speaking through an interpreter, they had never realised that Joseph was their brother. So too the gentile church through history has been unable to reveal Jesus to His brethren. But finnaly, he reveals Himself, and they fall on each others necks and weep. (like in Zechariah)

As I mentioned in my previous letter, the Egyptians are not jealous of his brothers (now maybe Jopseph wont love us) but rejoyce because they love Joseph. Gen 45:18 "come, the best of the land is yours!"

Finally, all Jacob's household went down, just as all Israel left Egypt in the Exodus, and as all Israel shall be saved when they look on Him who they have pierced. Hope this helps,

God bless, Colin

 

Shouldn't we consider that Israel = "The Chosen of God" and not a nationality? By chosen, I mean the elect. (This is not a debate on election, but God knows His own.) If His promises are continuous, which they are, then there are no breaks or zigzagging from one group to another.

Was Paul talking about thousands of years later that a remnant shall be saved? Paul wanted his own people to be saved, those he knew and loved. Otherwise, people reading what he wrote in the church might've been thinking, "Paul is crazy....how does he know these things are in the far future?" Which would then warrant the repsonse, "the remnant that he speaks of won't exist for at least 2000 years...what does that mean for the rest of the unsaved?"

Paul knew that only some would repent (which is obvious with our people today), but he wasn't talking about in the year "2525" or whatever year people come up with.

 

Bethelassoc,

Your point emphasizes an important principle in interpreting the N.T.-It explains the more enigmatic passages of the Old testament for the people of that time.

Too many today look at everything through modern-day glasses, forgetting that the NT had to make sense to the people of Paul's day.

In Christ,

Tim

 

Hi there, the trouble with this approach is two-fold.
Firstly, it contradicts Scripture. Paul explicitly defins Israel in Romans 9 as a nationality or race - "My brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel ... from them is traced the human ancestory of Christ" and Romans 11, "I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin" This is a national definition. Again in Romans 11:11 he contrasts Israel with gentiles, and hopes for the salvation of some of "his own people".
Oops, got to go. more later, by!