What do you think of Replacement Theology?

That is the theory that the church has forever replaced Israel in God's plan and therefore Israel (though unredeemed at this time) has no eschatological signifigance whatsoever in the things and events pertaining to the end. They are no longer a covenant nation before God the theory goes. I don't buy it myself and I think it has done more than a little harm over the centuries. There's more that could be said about it and what I have offered is just a very short summary of this belief.

I think this much. Be very careful here. Please do a search of the site on this subject. It has been gone through ad nauseum.

That is just a general warning, not to discourage anyone from further discussion. If it cannot be done with charity it will be swiftly brought down.

I don't buy it myself

Don't ever buy it. It is an error adopted by unlearned men and women, who won't turn the pages of the Holy Word of God.

Paul, in his writings in Romans, has much to say about this in the latter chapters.

Art Katz has much to say on this issue as well. If you are looking for teaching on this, I feel is Biblically sound, look to Art's writings on Deception and Israel.

http://www.benisrael.org/writings/online_books/mystery_of_israel_and_the_church/mic_contents.html

This is the website of what he has written on Israel and the Church.

Would anyone else confirm or witness to, on this forum, the truth of what Art has written here?

rich

I really didn't know that it had been gone through here before as you say. I don't get here that often because of other resonsibilities etc. but thanks for your comments. I wasn't trying to cause a commotion either. It's just that this subject and the other side issues coming from it have been on my mind lately. If people choose to let the comments stay where they are right now that is fine. The people I usually dialog with have little interest in the subject and it gets kind of frustrating when you want to talk about something but the interest people have is only marginal.

"Doc"

The Ben Israel website. I know it well and is the main source that I draw info on concerning the subject.

Thanks,

"Doc"

KrispyKrittr wrote:
Replacement Theology is rank heresy.

If you think Israel has been replaced, then read Revelation.

Krispy

Heresy, such as your not a Christian? i trust that is not what you meant.

If you are not trusting Christ, you are not in the tree- Jew or Gentile. You can't come to the Father without Christ- Jew or Gentile. Can you be in covenant with God while rejecting his son- Jew or Gentile?

Does anyone on either side of the debate disagree with the above?

Before everyone gets so "sure" about "replacement" theology being rank heresy as one brother put it, consider the following.

And yes this is written by a Jewish friend of mine-

[i]1.) There are no Jews to work with in Revelation. Jews are no longer ethnic Jews. Romans 2:26-29 - If those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.
A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.

2.) Jerusalem is no longer a physical city. The ethnic nation is no longer literal. The real Jerusalem is now above.
Galatians 4:21-26 - Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. WHERE IS JERUSALEM? ABOVE.

3.) Where is the temple? The temple today is our bodies – not one made by hands.
1 Cor. 6:19 - Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?

4.) What was the hope of Abraham and Moses and all of the heroes of the Bible? Was it to come back to the land of Israel and the nation? NO! They were looking forward to the heavenly Jerusalem. Hebrews 11 & 12 are a must read for this. (but I won’t display them here for brevity.)
But read Hebrews 11:39-40 - These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

This is great – the fulfillment for all, before and after Christ is fulfilled in Jesus Christ – now. Sometimes I don’t think that dispensationalist take the Book of Hebrews seriously when it says that Jesus sat down – it’s done for all.

So, here is my point, based on what I laid out above, who is a Jew, what and where is the true Jerusalem, what is defined as the temple and the fact that the OT saints were not looking to come back to the land but were looking for the heavenly Jerusalem, why on earth would anyone interpret the Book of Revelation to include everything that is just the opposite of what the NT writers described. If you think that the imagery had the readers scratching their heads, imagine what they were doing if trying to interpret this in today’s dispensational manner.[/i]

Here are some other things to consider-

The People of God
1)From the beginning, God selected one people alone, from all the earth.
Deu_7:6
Deu_10:15
Deu_14:2
Isa_41:8-9

2)This people would belong to him forever.
1Ki_6:13
1Ch_17:9
Isa_60:19-21

3)He would cast off, or exile this people for a time, for covenant unfaithfulness.
Deu_28:63-68
2Ki_17:20-24
2Ch_36:13-21
Hos_1:4-6
Hos_1:9

4)However, he would then gather them together again, and restore them.
Deu_30:4-9
Isa_10:21-23
Hos_1:7
Hos_1:10-11

5)When he restored them, he would also expand them, forming them anew from every people on earth.
Isa_2:1-3
Isa_11:9-16
Isa_19:23-25
Isa_24:13-15
Isa_42:4-12
Isa_49:1-12
Isa_51:5
Isa_60:1-9
Isa_66:10-24
Hos_2:23
Zec_2:10-13
Mal_1:11

6)The New Testament Church is the continuation of this one people.

Act_15:12-17
Rom_9:23-26
Rom_11:11-32
[Whether or not one sees a future for ethnic Israel in this passage is beside the point: in any case, there is only one people of God, represented by the one olive tree. Believing Gentiles have been grafted into this one tree, and unbelieving Jews broken off; but when they are grafted back in, it will be the same tree into which the Gentiles were grafted, God's people, true Israel.]
Gal_3:7-8
Gal_3:13-14
Eph_2:11-22
Eph_3:5-6

7)Hence, New Testament believers are called Jews, Abraham's seed, etc.

Rom_2:28-29
Rom_4:11-12
Rom_9:6-8
Gal_3:6-7
Gal_3:26-29
Gal_4:21-31
Gal_6:16
[The Greek conjunction may mean either "and" or "even"/"namely"; hence the context must determine the meaning. If it is taken in the sense of "and," so that "the Israel of God," is a different body from the Church, then Paul is contradicting himself and undermining the whole point he has been making throughout his letter! However, if it means "even," then the clear assertion that those who follow the "rule" of boasting only in the cross are in fact "the Israel of God," becomes a very fitting conclusion, and reiterates all that he has been teaching.]
Phi_3:3
Heb_12:22-24
1Pe_2:9-12
[Some have said that these Jewish terms are applied to the Church by way of analogy, not identification. However, when Peter goes on to speak of these ethnic "Gentiles" in contrast with the Gentiles, he makes it clear that he actually is intending to refer to them as Jews.]
Rev_2:9

The People of God
1)From the beginning, God selected one people alone, from all the earth.

Deu_7:6
Deu_10:15
Deu_14:2
Isa_41:8-9

2)This people would belong to him forever.

1Ki_6:13
1Ch_17:9
Isa_60:19-21

3)He would cast off, or exile this people for a time, for covenant unfaithfulness.

Deu_28:63-68
2Ki_17:20-24
2Ch_36:13-21
Hos_1:4-6
Hos_1:9

4)However, he would then gather them together again, and restore them.

Deu_30:4-9
Isa_10:21-23
Hos_1:7
Hos_1:10-11

5)When he restored them, he would also expand them, forming them anew from every people on earth.

Isa_2:1-3
Isa_11:9-16
Isa_19:23-25
Isa_24:13-15
Isa_42:4-12
Isa_49:1-12
Isa_51:5
Isa_60:1-9
Isa_66:10-24
Hos_2:23
Zec_2:10-13
Mal_1:11

6)The New Testament Church is the continuation of this one people.

Act_15:12-17
Rom_9:23-26
Rom_11:11-32
[Whether or not one sees a future for ethnic Israel in this passage is beside the point: in any case, there is only one people of God, represented by the one olive tree. Believing Gentiles have been grafted into this one tree, and unbelieving Jews broken off; but when they are grafted back in, it will be the same tree into which the Gentiles were grafted, God's people, true Israel.]
Gal_3:7-8
Gal_3:13-14
Eph_2:11-22
Eph_3:5-6

7)Hence, New Testament believers are called Jews, Abraham's seed, etc.

Rom_2:28-29
Rom_4:11-12
Rom_9:6-8
Gal_3:6-7
Gal_3:26-29
Gal_4:21-31
Gal_6:16
[The Greek conjunction may mean either "and" or "even"/"namely"; hence the context must determine the meaning. If it is taken in the sense of "and," so that "the Israel of God," is a different body from the Church, then Paul is contradicting himself and undermining the whole point he has been making throughout his letter! However, if it means "even," then the clear assertion that those who follow the "rule" of boasting only in the cross are in fact "the Israel of God," becomes a very fitting conclusion, and reiterates all that he has been teaching.]
Phi_3:3
Heb_12:22-24
1Pe_2:9-12
[Some have said that these Jewish terms are applied to the Church by way of analogy, not identification. However, when Peter goes on to speak of these ethnic "Gentiles" in contrast with the Gentiles, he makes it clear that he actually is intending to refer to them as Jews.]
Rev_2:9

NOTE: These were put together by a great brother named Nathan Pitchford, and not by myself, though they represent a good part of my views.

I have a question.

Biblically and historically, has the nation of Israel been restored to the land before or after repentance? And does the modern day nation-state of Israel follow that pattern?