The church didn't replace Israel, Christ did.

I see fulfillments in the New Testament, not replacements.

 

We were grafted on to the root is a good way of describing it.

 

The Church is the Body of Christ, so I would see the two as interchangeable. And, yes, with Ken: fulfillment, not replacement

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

We as the church are the body of Christ!!!

grace56

 

New Testament fulfilled Old Testament prophecies speak of Calvary & salvation. Not replacement.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

The Church exists in and through the Lord Jesus Christ and so is a distinctive New Testament reality [New Geneva Bible, page 1864]. However, as a people of the promised New Covenant [Jeremiah 31:31-33] which was instituted by the Lord Jesus Christ [Matthew 26:28, 1 Corinthians 11:25, Hebrews 8:6-13], who, as the incarnate God, is the promised seed of Abraham [Galatians 3:16] and the promised Messiah [John 4:25,26], there is a continuity with spiritual Israel, God’s covenant people of the Old Testament. The predominant teaching of the Church since Pentecost is that God has only one people and that the New Testament Church is the Israel of God, the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. The Baptist Faith and Message adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in Atlanta, Georgia on June 14, 2000 writes of the Church in Section VI as follows: “The New Testament speaks also of the Church as the Body of Christ which includes all the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

Scripture passages that teach that God has only one people are:

Galatians 3:29, KJV
29. And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Romans 2:28,29, KJV
28. For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29. But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.

Colossians 2:11, KJV
11. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

John P.Newport in The Lion and The Lamb [page 196] says of these passages:

“If believers are the true sons of Abraham, the true circumcision, then we must conclude that the Church is the true spiritual Israel, even though the word itself may not be used of the Church. This I believe to be confirmed by the expression, ‘the Israel of God’ in Galatians 6:16”

Galatians 6:16, KJV
16. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace [be] on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

Jesus Christ told the Jewish doubters in John 8:56: Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad. The Apostle Paul, in his epistle to the church at Galatia, wrote:

Galatians 3:8-9, KJV
8. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

The 11th chapter of Hebrews tells us that the Old Testament Saints considered themselves strangers and pilgrims on the earth and vividly portrays their longing to see that city whose builder and maker is God. That city is the the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, the general assembly and Church of the Firstborn [Hebrews 12:22-24], and.the chaste virgin bride of Jesus Christ [2 Corinthians 11:2].

 

Ro 2
2:28
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;


2:29
but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

 

She is His Bride guarnteed purpetuity and life because He gave His life for her. Mt 16/Eph 5
She is the great speckled bird of the OT. Jer 12:9
How could Christ replace His Bride? Not hardly.
Thanks -----Bart

 

Forgive me Daniel, I misread the topic. I have never heard that the Jews were replaced by Christ. How can that be? I noticed a few above that believe they are jews now because of Christ. There were some of those in Acts 15 that were shut down by James "wherefore my sentence is....". These are they who would still trouble the church and the weak brethern putting the yoke of the law back on our necks. I am so thankful today that the yoke of Christ is not the yoke of the law.

Hello Wopik, did you ever tell us where you attend services and in what city?
Thanks -----Bart

 

Clearly, God's gonna deal with LITERAL ISRAEL, as He said, FOR THE SAKE OF HIS WORD AND HIS REPUTATION. He mentions there are those who will say, "God chose a people & then couldn't preserve them or care for them." He makes this plain in various passages in Isaiah that He's gonna restpre both Judah and Israel back into one nation and perform all the good things He's promised to them IN SPITE OF THEMSELVES. However, He does NOT promise to automatically save every one of them; He DOES say he will open their eyes to whom Jesus really is...the MESSIAH & SAVIOR...but it will still be up to the individual to come to Him, same as it is for us.

As was said above, the BODY OF CHRIST is every righteous person from all ages and peoples. Of course this includes many Jews and Israelis, but it IS separate from literal Judah and Israel.

 

I rejoice at the clarification of the role of women in ministry evidenced in the BfaM or 6/14/2000. I am disappointed at the murkiness of “the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all of the ages”. NONE OF THE TEXTS CITED SUPPORT SUCH A CONCLUSION!!! LOOK ‘EM UP – Matthew 16:15-19; 18:15-20; Acts 2:41-42,47; 5:11-14; 6:3-6; 13:1-3; 14:23,27; 15:1-30; 16:5; 20:28; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16; 5:4-5; 7:17; 9:13-14; 12; Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-11,21; 5:22-32; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:18; 1 Timothy 2:9-14; 3:1-15; 4:14; Hebrews 11:39-40; 1 Peter 5:1-4; Revelation 2-3; 21:2-3.

NOTE THE CONSPICUOUS ABSENCE OF SUPPORT FOR SUCH A CONCLUSION!!!

OldReg,

You said,

I will address these in reverse order:

The church is not “the Israel of God”. A normal interpretation of kai in Gal 6:16 specifically prohibits such an interpretation as reflected in the ASV, AV, KJ21, NAS, NAS95, NKJ. Unfortunately the Greek structure is not clearly reflected in the either the NIV or the RSV. Yet the word “Israel(ite,s) appears 77 times in the NT and in NTHER INSTANCE CAN YOUR CONCLUSIONS FIND EVEN THE WEAK SUPPORT claimed from a non-standard handling of the Greek in this passage!

The predominant teaching of “church since Pentecost” has been that the Pope is the vicar of God and that his words carry the same authority as the written word! True believers, who hold to a contextual literal grammatical historical hermeneutic have not, as a majority held to such a position. While there are some covenant amillennialists within the ranks of Baptist, most hold to a pretrib premil position which clearly distinguishes between national Israel and the church.

Gotta go. Plan to finish later tonight.

 

OldReg,

The distinction between the Church, Jews, and Gentiles is clearly maintained throughout the New Testament. 1Cor 10:32 says, “Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:” Paul clearly identifies “Israel” as his “kinsmen according to the flesh. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises”.

The term “Israel (ites)” in the Bible refers to the physical seed of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob (Israel). Sometimes a distinction is made between those who are believing Israelites and those who are not, but you never find Gentiles and Jews together in one body called “Israel”. You do find Jews and Gentiles together in one body called the church.

Nowhere is the New Covenant said to be between God and the Church. The New Covenant is clearly stated to be between God and house of Israel and Judah.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

“With the house of Israel and with the house of Jacob”! How can you read that as “Church”? God did not bring the Church out of Egypt! God brought the nation of Israel out of Egypt. God did not make a covenant at Sinai with the church, He made it with Israel. The church did not break the Mosaic Covenant, the Jews did. Yahweh was never a husband to the church – The church is the bride of Jesus. Israel was an unfaithful wife and an adulterous woman. The church is always pictured in the NT as a chaste virgin.

Nor is the NT any less clear as to the parties of the New Covenant!

Heb 8:8 “... I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”
Heb 8:10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.”

How can you read “Israel” as “church”?!

The New Covenant contains clear references to a future total redemption of national Israel. Paul speaks of this in Roman 11.

Rom 11:
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
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:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Verse 27 links this total national redemption with God’s Covenant to take away their sins. How can you take the nation of Israel out and replace her with the church? Read the passage and substitute the word “church” for “Israel” and “Jacob” to see just how little sense is found in Replacement Theology! A contextual literal grammatical historical hermeneutic is the only thing that makes sense! Israel is Israel, not the church.

Israel was the people of God, and will be again. The church is the people of God. BUT THE CHURCH IS NOT ISRAEL AND THE PROMISES TO ISRAEL HAVE NOT TRANSFERRED TO THE CHURCH!!! Our blessings are spiritual and heavenly. Many of the promises to Israel were national, physical, and earthly.

IF ISRAEL IS THE CHURCH, SHOW ME ONE PASSAGE WHERE ISRAEL HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY CAST AWAY, AND REPLACED BY THE CHURCH. YOU CAN’T DO IT. WHY NOT???

Because Israel’s blindness and rebellion is temporary and one day “all Israel shall be saved” when the Deliverer comes out of Zion.

 

DD,

Amazing, based on what is clearly a figure of speech, you discount all of the numerous specific promises to the Nation of Israel!

Unbelievable! Perhaps we should argue that Jesus has feathers based on Matt 23:37? Or, that God has feathers based on Psalm 91:4 - “ He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust...”

In the passage you cite, Jesus does use alhthinos (true) to contrast his faithfulness with the unfaithfulness of the nation of Israel. Their unfaithfulness cannot really be seriously questioned! What you ARE questioning is GOD’S FAITHFULNESS to restore them to the land as He promised in Deut 30 and many other places.

To suggest that Christ has replaced Israel as the covenant people is ABSURD!!!

Is John 15:1 the best you have?

 

rjprince

"Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God" Gal 6:16 -> THE ELECT!!!!"

Gal 6:16 was actually a salutation of Paul's based on the previous verse(s) given as a rule for all to go by - yesterday and today.
"For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.(vs.15_"

 

rjprince
Hi rjprince,

[I accidently cut out most of my post above so this is the entirity of it]
"Peace and mercy be upon...the ISRAEL of God" Gal 6:16 -> THE ELECT!!!!"
Gal 6:16 was actually a salutation of Paul's based on the previous verse(s) given as a rule for all to go by - yesterday and today.
"For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.(vs.15_"

-------------------------------------------------
In 'Word Studies In the New Testament' by Vincent, pg.180, Paul bases the next verse, 16, one the new creation

"And upon the Israel of God. The kai and may be simply connective, in which case the Israel of God may be different from as many as walk, etc., and may mean truly converted Jews. Or the kaimay be explicative, in which case the Israel of God will define and emphasize as many as, and will mean the whole body of Christians, Jewish and Gentile. In other words, they who walk according to this rule [of being a new creation] form the true Israel of God. The explicative kai is at best doubtful here, and is rather forced, ...It seems better to regard it as simply connective. Then (.*..) will refer to the individual Christians, Jewish and Gentile, and Israel of God to the same Christians, regarded collectively, and forming the true messianic community.

(*was unable to type that word on my keyboard)
-------------------------------------------------
Again, concerning Gal6:15-16 of "the new creation" referring to both Jews and Gentiles.

Wuest, 'Word Studies In The Greek New Testament', pg 179, sect. of Galatians 16:15….."It is because, while circumcision is of no avail to the Jew, nor the lack of circumcision of any avail to the Gentile, yet the Cross has power to make of believing Jew and Gentile a new creation which results in a radical transformation of character.

Translation. For neither circumcision is anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

(v16)...Those therefore, who order their lives by the Holy Spirit's control, constitute the true Israel of God, not the Jews who have the name of Israel but are only children of Abraham after the flesh. The Greek word for "and" also has the meaning of "even" in some contexts. We translate here, "even the Israel of God" as identifying those who "walk according to this rule."
----------------------------------------------

'Galatians' by R. Alan Cole, Tyndale, pgs 182-184

"The only thing that matters now is that Jew and Gentile alike are 'newly-created men' in Christ...Just as Genesis showed a creation marred and spoiled by sin, so surely in prophet and apocalyptist arose the picture of a new universe, a new ktisis of God (e.g. Is. lxv.17 taken up by Rev. xxi) in which God's active work as Creator is stressed...."

"The second half of verse 16 poses a question of interpretation which hangs on the exact meaning of the introductory kai. Does the word mean 'and,' 'in additon to,' or 'even,' 'that is to say'? A strong case can be made for both views. If the word is to be translated 'and,’ then Paul's final prayer is directed towards those Gentiles who realize the unimportance of their physical state, and to Jews who likewise realize the unimportance of circumcision. By so doing, they prove themselves to be the true Israel, God's Israel, the 'righteous remnant.'...It would be a full recognition of the fact that Jew and Gentile alike are fellow-heirs of the grace of life;..."

"The other translation is bolder, but Paul is quite capable of it. This is to take kai as 'even.' 'that is to say,' 'the equivalent of.'...This would identify the new group, the 'THIRD RACE OF MEN' of whom the Church fathers delighted to talk - neither Jew nor Gentile, but Christian- with God's Israel. This is often put bluntly as 'the Church is the new Israel.' Put thus, we may well want to qualify the statement;...In the first place, if kai does not mean 'even,' then Paul is allowing two groups side by side in the kingdom of God; first, those who 'live according to the principle' enunciated in verse 15, and, secondly, God's Israel. But those of Israel who do not have this 'principle' are thereby automatically excluded from the true Israel, God's Israel. This is the inevitable deduction from Paul's reasoning above. In other words, while there is place for the believing Christian Jew in the kingdom, there is not for the Judaizer. Paul would go further. He would say that the 'believing Jew' belongs to Israel, but that the Judaizer does not. Thus there cannot be two groups; there can only be one."

"But it is important to remember that, while Paul says that Christians are 'true' Jews.' he never says that Gentiles are Jews, nor Jews Gentiles; that is an illegitimate deduction. What he does say is that believing Jew and believing Gentile alike form the 'Israel of God,' the instrument of His purpose. It is interesting to remember in the context of verse 16 that 'Peace upon Israel' is the great Old Testament blessing (Ps cxxv.5)."

Whew! Very interesting that Paul uses an Old Testament blessing on New Testament Jews wouldn't you say, RJPRINCE? Why would Paul do that if he did not consider them to be New Covenant Israel of God Jews? Is it perhaps that Paul does definitely consider them to be the elect as well? Appears that way to me.

I'M ALMOST DONE -
'MATTHEW HENRY COMMENTARY' pg, 1846 (Don't you just love Matt)

[Paul] knew that in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availed anything nor uncircumcision, as to men's acceptance with God, but a new creature....It does not consist in our being in this or the other denomination of Christians; but it consists in our being new creatures;...No outward professions, nor particular names, will ever be sufficient to recommend us to him...And as many as walk according to this rule [of being a new creation] peace be upon them, and mercy upon the Israel of God...[Peace and mercy, Paul] declares, shall be the portion of all the Israel of God, all sincere Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, all who are Israelites indeed."


Romans 10:10-13 …."For MAN (that is Jew and Gentile RJ) believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved. The scripture says, NNE who belives in him will be put to shame. For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon ALL (Jews included RJ) who call upon him. For, EVERY ONE (Jews aren't excluded here either RJ) who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved."

Now if they are saved, are they not the ELECT? If they- the Jews, are saved and the elect, are they not also apart of the Church?

Finally, if you are interested, there is an excellent tape worth listening to on this very verse by someone more learned than I:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsbible&sermonID=4180420539

 

rjprince,

I can only say Amen. You've done an exceptional job at debunking the 'Church has replaced Israel' idea. As I've said on another board Christ is not the Church, nor is the Church Christ. Christ is in the Church, and the Church is in Christ. The righteous who died in O.T. times are in Christ not the Church, and those righteous who die after the Church dispensation. shall be in Christ as well. At some point in the future, redeemed National Israel shall be in Christ not the Church. We all shall be one in Christ, not one in Church.

 

jprince/TakeChrist4Life

While I'm waiting to get a new account for myself so I can let my alter-ego pat myself on the back, I will put the challenge back on you -

Romans 10:10-13 …."For MAN (that is Jew and Gentile RJ) believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved. The scripture says, NNE who belives in him will be put to shame. For there is NO distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon ALL (Jews included RJ) who call upon him. For, EVERY ONE (Jews aren't excluded here either RJ) who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved."

Now if they are saved, are they not the ELECT? If they- the Jews, are saved and the elect, are they not a "new creation"? If they are "a new creation, are they not also apart of the Church? And if Jews today are Christians, and they were Christians at the birth of the church, then as you say "the believing Jews of the OT were saved in Christ" then you have a real dilemma don't you? And why? Because since there is an obvious remnant of continuity --THERE IS NO DISTINCTION AND IF THERE IS NO DISTINCTION - THERE IS NO DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGY!

Now, when Paul used the 'Old Testament blessing on New Testament Jews, in Gal 6:16, questions still remain unanswered;

1) Why would Paul do that if he did not consider them to be New Covenant Israel of God Jews?

2) Is it perhaps that Paul does definitely consider them to be the elect as well?

3) Now, according to the way that you choose to interpret Gal 6:16, Paul is blessing national Israel. But why on earth would Paul bless national Israel (the Judaizer) as elsewhere he has only harsh words for them for rejecting the Messiah??????

4) Where in the OT do you find God blessing unrepentant anybody?

Soooooooo, in a contextual literal grammatical historical hermeneutic sense, as is used frequently in posts, this can mean nothing else but that Paul is NOT blessing unrepentant national Israel as the Israel of God - except for the remnant saved by Grace consisting of both believing Jews and Gentiles!!

So, I would have to say that "....debunking the 'Church has replaced Israel' idea" hasn't been accomplished yet. (Must still be those blue trees of the Darby Scofield National Forest.)

 

rjprince,

Aaaand, it looks like scripture silenced yet another one!