"Today they are no good"????
Your terminology, "no good", is pretty interesting.
What do you call the "Greeks" (gentiles) who fail to acceot Christ, "no good"????
Is, or is not the Bride of Christ - the Church - RIGHT NOW composed of “Jew and Greek” alike (Romans 10:12)?
You continued: "So with replacement theology, which came a bit later...."
"Replacement Theology" is a derogatory term made up by dispensationalists used to label anyone who believes in Covenant (of grace & faith) Theology.
Outside of the dispensationalist bibles (Ryrie/Scofield) you said you prefer to read because you said you are a "literalist", you will find no others pushing the false "replacement theology" accusation onto its readers.
Covenant (of grace and faith) theologians deny that God has abandoned his promises to Israel, but see the fulfillment of the promises to Israel in the person and the work of the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, who established the church in organic continuity with Israel, not a separate replacement entity.
The Abrahamic covenant is
1.Exclusive: It is only for Abraham and his (spiritual) descendants.Genesis 17:7
2.Everlasting: It is not replaced by any later covenant. Genesis 17:7
3.Accepted by faith, not works: "Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness. "Genesis 15:6
4.The external sign of entering into the Abrahamic covenant was circumcision. Genesis 17:10, but is has to be matched by an internal change, the circumcision of the heart. Jeremiah 4:4
5.According to Paul, since the Abrahamic covenant is eternal, the followers of Christ are "children of Abraham" and therefore part of this covenant through faith. "Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham." Galatians 3:7
6.Paul makes it clear that baptism is the external sign of faith in Christ ("...you were baptized into Christ..."), and that through faith in Christ the believer is part of the Abrahamic covenant ("Abraham's seed"). This provides the basis for the doctrine that baptism is the New Testament sign of God's covenant with Abraham.
Galatians 3:26: "So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."
The New Covenant (of grace and faith) is
anticipated with the hopes of the Davidic messiah, and most explicitly predicted by the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 31:34). At the Last Supper, Jesus alludes to this prophecy, as well as to prophecies such as Isaiah 49:8, when he says that the cup of the Passover meal is "the New Covenant in [his] blood."
This use of the Old Testament typology is developed further in the Epistle to the Hebrews (see especially chs. 7-10). Jesus is the last Adam and Israel's hope and consolation: he is the fulfillment of the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17-18). He is the prophet greater than Jonah (Matt 12:41), and the Son over the house where Moses was a servant (Hebrews 3:5-6), leading his people to the heavenly promised land. He is the high priest greater than Aaron, offering up himself as the perfect sacrifice once for all (Hebrews 9:12, 26). He is the king greater than Solomon (Matthew 12:42), ruling forever on David's throne (Luke 1:32). The term "New Testament" comes from the Latin translation of the Greek New Covenant and is most often used for the collection of books in the Bible, can also refer to the New Covenant as a theological concept.
As an aside, there's an interesting read here:Olive Tree Theology
You continued:"..., we end up with what Martin Luther, who I BTW admire for many non Jewish issues, thought about the Jews and eventually Adolf Hitler,"
Is this worse than when we find dispensationalists anathematizing other Christians -- ie: the Catholic Church by equating it with "Babylon","The Great Whore", and other equally derogatory terminology?
This sort of thing is not new as the Apostles themselves have been falsely accused of "bashing Jews":
".... In the linked article above on Peter and Paul, we explained the "why" of Paul's claim that the distinction between Jew and Gentile has been erased. Our commentator blames Paul for this being at the root of so-called "replacement theology" as well as "all of Christian anti-Semitism that has been perpetrated against Jewish people throughout history" -- never mind that Matthew and John have been likewise accused of this by the equally contriving seeking to place blame. It remains that Paul gives us "supplemental theology" and not replacement theology, and if our commentator wants to blame Paul for how his words have been misused, then I will introduce him to some Skeptics who will cause him to abandon the words of Jesus as well. ..."
I agree, poor choice of words only God is good. I was sort of projecting asking is this how preterists judgmentally think about Jews because they failed in 73 AD ? Things can be good but if we call people good we are judging them as things. Also, we get into the good people bad people mode which is judgmental. We are all poor miserable sinners, beggars for grace in need of a savior. We are all the same.