Where did the idea of "Replacement Theology" come from?

SheEagle911 said:

The Jews didn't crucify the Savior.

That's not what the Bible says.

Peter acknowledges that the Crucifixion was decreed by God. He acknowledges that the Romans were the means by which it was accomplished - but when it comes to the perpetrator who was actually morally responsible - Peter puts the blame squarely on the "men of Israel."

A few years ago it was said that something like 70% of Israeli Jews were actually non-practicing atheists or agnostics. Assuming that figure is the same today, then spiritually is modern-day Israel any better off than in the days of the Babylonian exile? Why should we believe that God is blessing the modern-day apostates who live there when he didn't tolerate the ancient apostasy?

 

Sheeagle said:

Yes, God promised to wipe out the nation of Israel so they would be ruled by Gentiles. But you didn't finish reading the passage in Deuteronomy. He also promised they would return back to the Land of Promise. That began happening in 1948. He also said there would always be a remnant.

PtW says:

I know that God promised to bring Jews back into the land. Here is where you ere: you say that it must be the group in 1948 and therefore we should whole heartedly back them. Where in the Bible does it say 1948? You have made a major assumption. You may be right and that is fine. My point is that the promise was for a generation of Jews. It doesn't say which. The apple of his eye are the righteous Jews, not every Jew.

Quick question for you:
Where does the Jews who rejects Christ spend eternity? Remember, according to you, they are the apple of his eye.

 

As a quick note, I support the Friends of Israel ministry. I have bought alot of material from them. I think some of the greatest minds exist in that ministry.

Sheeagle said:

PTW, you can call Israel apostate if you choose. But God is the God of the Covenant to Israel. It is a Covenant that is unconditional. It will not be broken.

PtW says:

Oh, so there isn't a need to evangelize the Jew. They are still part of the covenant. They are still God's people. He will excuse their rejection of his Son because they are Abraham's decendants.

Wrong. Jesus was very clear about his role in their salvation - John 14:6.

The unconditional covenant was fulfilled in Christ. Here me out. Those who reject Christ are not part of the covenant. Who are the ones that will be a partaker of the millenial reign with Christ? It is only those who have embraced Christ. Unbelievers will not enter the kingdom. Only believers will. You must understand this. This is a premillenial distinctive.

 

I am quite aware that our Scriptures and Savior came from the Jews.

I am not anti-Jewish. I just don't pretend they are on our side.

Right now, they are a political ally. I still don't know what that has to do with the gospel and end times. You don't know if we are about to enter the end times or not.

 

sheeagle said:

It is because of Israel and America's care for and protection of Jewish people and for spreading the Gospel throughout the World that America has been blessed in spite of our many sins.

PtW says:

With all due respect, this sounds like something some evangelist said who doesn't know what he is talking about.

The Jews in America are largely very liberal and not saved. The Jews in Israel are atheistic if not very much against Christianity.

Nowhere are we promised protection as Christians. You must not be very familiar with worldwide Christianity. I think an estimated 165,000 Christians will be martyrs this year. They aren't just Christians who die; they die because they are Christians. American Christians enjoy the protection of a mighty military.

 

sheeagle said:

You have forgotten something else, too. There are a great many born-again Christians, brothers & sisters in Christ, who live in Israel. And not all of them are Jews. Some are Palestinians.

PtW says:

I did not forget. When a Jew is saved, he is part of the body of Christ. There is no racial distinction within the body of Christ (Gal.3:28).

Christians live throughout the world. That doesn't make individual countries Christian. America is not a Christian nation. There is no such thing. We are pilgrims, strangers in this world. This world is not our home.

 

sheeagle said:

I will make no apology: I love the land of Israel and her people and pray for the peace of Jerusalem. My Saviour walked the streets and hills where suicide bombers with AK-47s now roam.

PtW says:

I make no apology for anything I have said. I desire the peace of Israel also. That will not happen until Christ returns though. Don't forget, our Savior walked the streets where false teachers and anti-christ Jewish rabbis walk also.

Here is another question for you:
Which is more destructive... a suicide bomber or a false teacher that makes converts twice the child of satan? Your answer would be interesting.

 

Would someone who believes Israel is no longer Gods chossen people explain Romans Chapter 11.

I will quote verses 26-29.

"And so all Isreal shall be saved; as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliver and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sake. For the gift and calling of God are without repentance."

Paul based this upon the book of Jeremiah 31:31-34.

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Isreal, and the house of Judah:......"

The church is not Isreal or Judah!

The reason those who teach this error, have to teach it, is because without making the church the same as Isreal most of their theology would have to go out the window.

 

Bible Student, they will be again in the future. Read all of Romans 11. The Jews that he grafts in again are those who look upon him whom they have pierced. Right now, they are enemies according to the gospel.

 

This will be the third time in this thread I've pointed out that Heb 8:8-13 discusses the fulfillment of Jer 31:31. The new covenant is applied to the church in scripture.

 

But no matter how many times you "point it out" the burden is still on you to show any fulfillment in that passage. You will in fact find no language of fulfillment in the church. The fact that something is quoted as support of something else does not signify a fulfillment of it. I think if you read the passage closely, you will see that there is indeed no fulfillment of the NC with the church because in fact the NC was not made with the church. It directed to the house of Israel and the house of Judah, something that the author of Hebrews repeats. Let us not change the text to fit our presuppositions. Let us let the text say what it does.

 

Why do you think the author of Hebrews is referring to Jer 31:31? Who is under the new covenant, the church or "the house of Israel"?

 

BrianT, will the New Covenant have any application to a future Jewish generation?

If you say yes, then the church does not "fulfill" the New Covenant. The church is a "partaker" of it but does not "fulfill" it.

If you say no, then words mean something other than their intended meaning.

 

I say yes, but only if they accept Christ (and thus become part of the church). But don't misunderstand what I am saying - I think the promise of the new covenant *already has* come to the house of Israel. Some (very few) accepted it, and then Gentiles were grafted in. Now, the true Israel, in a spirtual sense, is the church. The covenant is already fulfilled.

 

BrianT, I would say that the New Covenant has already been initiated. When Jews are saved, they become part of the church. However, if the covenant is fulfilled, it is done with. The church is not the house of Israel. The church is neigher Jew nor Gentile but one new man (Eph.2:14). The Covenant is made for the house of Israel. The church partakes of the covenant because the church is "in" Christ.

 

I guess I should have said the *promise* of the new covenant is fulfilled.

The "church" and "the house of Israel" are not opposites. The church *is* the house of Israel (those that accepted Christ, anyway) with believing Gentiles grafted in. The church doesn't just "partake" in the new covenant, the church is defined by the new covenant.

[ October 08, 2002, 01:44 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

The New Covenant was more than salvation. The N.C. included the promise of land. The church does not have such a promise. This world is not our home. This is what Pastor Larry is always saying. The authors of the N.T. didn't reinvent passages. The author of Hebrews just states the passage. He assumed that someone was familiar with the Jeremiah passage.

 

Luke 22:20 In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

If an Israelite does not accept Christ's blood, they do not accept the covenant. If they accept Christ's blood, they are part of the church. They are not all Israel, which are of Israel.

 

BrianT, agreed, but that doesn't nullify anything I already said.

 

Because the point of Hebrews 8 is not the second party of hte new covenant (whether the church or Israel) but the first party, the great high priest who did what no other high priest could do. The NC is with the house of Israel, not with the church. The church participates in hte blessings of the NC with regard to redemption.