Posted on 10/26/2007 9:00:59 PM PDT by topcat54
Replacement theology has become dispensationalism's latest prophetic boogeyman. If you want to end a debate over eschatology, just charge your opponent with holding to replacement theology. What is “replacement theology,” sometimes called “supersessionism,” and why do dispensationalists accuse non-dispensationalists of holding it? Here’s a typical dispensational definition:
Replacement Theology: a theological perspective that teaches that the Jews have been rejected by God and are no longer God’s Chosen People. Those who hold to this view disavow any ethnic future for the Jewish people in connection with the biblical covenants, believing that their spiritual destiny is either to perish or become a part of the new religion that superseded Judaism (whether Christianity or Islam).1
“Replacement theology” is dispensationalism’s trump card in any debate over eschatology because it implies anti-semitism. Hal Lindsey attempted to use this card in his poorly researched and argued The Road to Holocaust.2 He wove an innovative tale implying that anyone who is not a dispensationalist carries the seeds of anti-semitism within his or her prophetic system. This would mean that every Christian prior to 1830 would have been theologically anti-semitic although not personally anti-semtic.
As Peter Leithart and I point out in The Legacy of Hatred Continues,3 it’s dispensationalists who hold to a form of replacement theology since they believe that Israel does not have any prophetic significance this side of the rapture! Prior to the rapture, in terms of dispensational logic, the Church has replaced Israel. This is unquestionably true since God’s prophetic plan for Israel has been postponed until the prophetic time clock starts ticking again at the beginning of Daniel’s 70th week which starts only after the Church is taken to heaven in the so-called rapture. Until then, God is dealing redemptively with the Church. Am I making this up? Consider the following by dispensationalist E. Schuyler English:
An intercalary4 period of history, after Christ’s death and resurrection and the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, has intervened. This is the present age, the Church age. . . . During this time God has not been dealing with Israel nationally, for they have been blinded concerning God’s mercy in Christ. . . . However, God will again deal with Israel as a nation. This will be in Daniel’s seventieth week, a seven-year period yet to come.5
According to English and every other dispensationalist, the Church has replaced Israel until the rapture. The unfulfilled promises made to Israel are not fulfilled until after the Church is taken off the earth. Thomas Ice, one of dispensationalism’s rising stars, admits that the Church replaces Israel this side of the rapture: “We dispensationalists believe that the church has superseded Israel during the current church age, but God has a future time in which He will restore national Israel ‘as the institution for the administration of divine blessings to the world.’”6
Dispensationalists claim that their particular brand of eschatology is the only prophetic system that gives Israel her proper place in redemptive history. This is an odd thing to argue since two-thirds of the Jews will be slaughtered during the post-rapture tribulation, and the world will be nearly destroyed. Charles Ryrie writes in his book The Best is Yet to Come that during this post-rapture period Israel will undergo “the worst bloodbath in Jewish history.”7 The book’s title doesn’t seem to very appropriate considering that during this period of time most of the Jews will die! John Walvoord follows a similar line of argument: “Israel is destined to have a particular time of suffering which will eclipse any thing that it has known in the past. . . . [T]he people of Israel . . . are placing themselves within the vortex of this future whirlwind which will destroy the majority of those living in the land of Palestine.”8 Arnold Fruchtenbaum states that during the Great Tribulation “Israel will suffer tremendous persecution (Matthew 24:15–28; Revelation 12:1–17). As a result of this persecution of the Jewish people, two-thirds are going to be killed.”9
During the time when Israel seems to be at peace with the world, she is really under the domination of the antichrist who will turn on her at the mid-point in the seven-year period. Israel waits more than 2000 years for the promises finally to be fulfilled, and before it happens, two-thirds of them are wiped out. Those who are charged with holding a “replacement theology viewpoint” believe in no inevitable future Jewish bloodbath. In fact, we believe that the Jews will inevitably embrace Jesus as the Messiah this side of the Second Coming. The fulfillment of Zechariah 13:8 is a past event. It may have had its fulfillment in the events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Contrary to dispensationalism’s interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus' disciples warned the Jewish nation for nearly forty years about the impending judgment (Matt. 3:7; 21:42–46; 22:1–14; 24:15–22). Those who believed Jesus’ words of warning were delivered “from the wrath to come” (1 Thess. 1:10). Those who continued to reject Jesus as the promised Messiah, even though they had been warned for a generation (Matt. 24:34), “wrath has come upon them to the utmost” (1 Thess. 2:16; cf. 1 Thess. 5:1–11; 2 Pet. 3:10–13).
Before critics of replacement theology throw stones, they need to take a look at their own prophetic system and see its many lapses in theology and logic.
Read Part Two of this article...
2. Hal Lindsey, The Road to Holocaust (New York: Bantam Books, 1989). The address for Bantam Books is 666 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York.
3. Gary DeMar and Peter J. Leithart, The Legacy of Hatred Continues: A Response to Hal Lindsey’s The Road to Holocaust (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1989).
4. Inserted into the calendar.
5. E. Schuyler English, A Companion to the New Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1972), 135.
6. Thomas Ice, “The Israel of God,” The Thomas Ice Collection: www.raptureready.com/featured/TheIsraelOfGod.html#_edn3
7. Charles C. Ryrie, The Best is Yet to Come (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1981), 86.
8. John F. Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1962), 107, 113. Emphasis added.
9. Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, “The Little Apocalypse of Zechariah,” The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack, eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003), 262.
They are the same as the Jews before Christ and during Christ and after Christ — waiting for Him to come and rule on earth.
“You can’t just suddenly change “near” to also mean “distant future” to make it fit your personal belief.”
Well, try this one then.
Dan 9:23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew [thee]; for thou [art] greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
Here’s the entire scope of salvation prophecy: Finish transgression; end of sin; reconciliation for iniquity; everlasting righteousness; anoint the most Holy. We are given “70” weeks for this to be accomplished.
Dan 9:24 ¶ Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
In 69 of those weeks we have:restoration of Jerusalem, roads, walls, coming of Messiah, Messiah’s death, destruction of Jerusalem, destruction of the temple and war.
Dan 9:25-26 Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
In the 70th week he (the anti christ)makes a pact with Israel, in the middle of the period he breaks the pact, causes the sacrifice and worship to cease (this assumes a restored temple and sacrificial worship), sets up the abomination of desolation until the end.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Since you can’t just suddenly change words to make them fit your personal belief, how do you get the abomination of desolation set up at the same time of the destruction of the temple?.
So, stop talking nonsense.
= = =
That could be rather difficult.
It’s one of the main backbone doctrines of the system.
No. I did not bring that up at all. But now that you mention it, that is another good reason.
Hank's business practices and the manner in which he wrestled control of CRI are not shining examples of good Christian ethics. Go to the Walter Martin website and find out why Hank Hannegraff is not a man to be trusted.
And what about all the converts who came into the nation of Israel, got circumcised, and set up households. How would you tell them from the "real Jews"?
"Jewish DNA".
I went there but saw nothing about Hank. Where would I find this?
OK, so you proved you know some math.
Even today men are able to father children well into their senior years, much longer than women are able to bear children. Outside the Bible, the oldest father on record was a fellow from Australia who was 93 when his wife presented him with a child.
And Abraham lived to be 175, so by our standards he was still middle aged when Isaac was born.
Second, Sarah says that she is no longer having pleasure with Abraham in Gen.18:12. since they are now both old.
Do you make this stuff up yourself, or is someone feeding it to you?
9 Then they said to him, "Where is Sarah your wife?" So he said, "Here, in the tent." 10 And He said, "I will certainly return to you according to the time of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son." (Sarah was listening in the tent door which was behind him.) 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. 12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, "After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?" 13 And the Lord said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, 'Shall I surely bear a child, since I am old?' 14 Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son." (Gen. 18)It’s pretty clear from the context and all we know about Abraham and Sarah and their desire for a child that the "pleasure" in view was the pleasure f a child, not some sexual gratification. The Hebrew word "pleasure" there has no sexual connotation in the Bible.
God regenerating both Sarah's and Abraham's sexual organs.
But the Bible doesn’t say that, only your imagination.
Abraham was able to have children after Sarah's death when he remarried,
Demonstrating that his "dead phallus" was probably not the issue.
Get with the program. You’re dialoging with a dispensationalist.
Just a reminder that Walter is dead and the web site is run by some of his apparently unhappy children.
Just curious, but where does it say that in the Bible?
They have to prove their lineage from the 12 tribes.
Again, where does it say that in the Bible?
I cannot believe we are even arguing this!
And I can’t believe you know so little about God’s covenant people.
Well, let’s take a look.
of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. 6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, "In Isaac your seed shall be called." 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise: "At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.Interesting, not all Israel is real Israel. Paul tells us the same thing in Romans 2:
28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 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.According to Paul it is not physical circumcision that makes one a Jew, but circumcision of the heart. IOW, all the righteous who are circumcised in the heart are spiritual Jews.
A christian is neither a Jew or Gentile (Gal.3)
There is nothing in Galatians 3 that say any such thing. The phrase neither Jew nor Greek is intended by Paul to teach that racial barriers no longer exist in the household of faith. As he said in Eph. 2 the middle wall of partition has been broken down, and there is but one household of faith, the spiritual commonwealth of Israel. He does say that a Christian is a child of Abraham and thus part of spiritual Israel (Gal. 6:16).
Gotcha.
Just for the record, the text does not say that. Dispensational theology says that.
Wait, I have it. If we just insert a gap of, oh, let’s say 2 or 3 thousands years, maybe more, right in there after "shall Messiah be cut off" then this will all work out according to the Notes.
“Just for the record, the text does not say that”
Really,
Isn’t the destruction of Jersulem and the temple contained in the 69th week of the prophecy?
Who is the “he” (the prince vs. 26) mentioned in the 70th week in verse 27?
How can the sacrifice and worship cease in the 70th week unless the temple that was destroyed in the 69th week is restored (it took 46 years to build Herod’s temple)?
What is the abomination of desolation in the middle of the 70th week in verse 27?
How can all of this take place in 70 A.D. when the prophecy itself has them take place in separate time periods?
Here’s the entire scope of salvation prophecy: Finish transgression; end of sin; reconciliation for iniquity; everlasting righteousness; anoint the most Holy. We are given “70” weeks for this to be accomplished.
Dan 9:24 ¶ Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
In 69 of those weeks we have:restoration of Jerusalem, roads, walls, coming of Messiah, Messiah’s death, destruction of Jerusalem, destruction of the temple and war.
Dan 9:25-26 Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
In the 70th week he (the anti christ)makes a pact with Israel, in the middle of the period he breaks the pact, causes the sacrifice and worship to cease (this assumes a restored temple and sacrificial worship), sets up the abomination of desolation until the end.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
First off, I’m no scholar of course, and there’s much I don’t know. But to accept the dispensational view, then there must be a 2,000-year gap between the 69th and 70th week and an assumed “third temple” when there’s no mention of it in Daniel nor anywhere else in the Bible. I think those are pretty big issues to just assume (i.e. eisegesis).
But here’s an interesting quote to consider by Clement of Alexandria, one of the Early Church fathers, on Daniel:
160 AD Clement of Alexandria (On Daniel 9:24-27 ; The ‘Seventy Weeks’ of Daniel) “And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfillment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, “the Holy of Holies,” having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father. In those “sixty and two weeks,” as the prophet said, and “in the one week,” was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place.” (Miscellanies 1:21)
BTW, can you answer my question: How does the “near” in Revelation take on the same meaning as the “distant future” in Daniel?
“And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfillment of the seven weeks”
When did this take place?
“BTW, can you answer my question: How does the “near” in Revelation take on the same meaning as the “distant future” in Daniel?”
About the same way as “the kingdom of God is in you” and “the kingdom of God is at hand”. It depends on the context. One of a parents greatest tool in dealing with insistant kids is “in a minute” as is a husband’s, watching the football game.
Walter Martin's Ministry does not live on in Hank Hannegraff. There were a lot of other people around at the time who were much more qualified to take on the mantle of "Bible Answer Man". Among them were John Stewart, Don Stewart and Greg Koukl. But the fact of the matter is that Walter Martin was one of a kind. I think it is sad that Hank managed to wrestle control of CRI. It was a great organization under Martin. It is not anymore.
No, actually it isn’t. If you read the text carefully, you we see that a number of things happen following the phrase "And after the sixty-two weeks" in verse 26. After the sixty-nine weeks (sixty-two plus the first seven) is the seventieth week. So all that follows is during the seventieth week. This includes, "Messiah shall be cut off" and "the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary." It continues, "He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering", etc.
The futurist believes that "he" in verse 27 refers to anti-Christ, as you inserted in your version of the passage. But t is also quite possible, even probable, that "He" refers to Messiah, who establishes His covenant and brings an end to the sacrifices in that last "week" of time. The "abomination" is related to the destruction of the city and sanctuary. All this happened in the time around the first coming of Christ. There is not need to insert some indeterminate "gap" of time and reconstruct the temple and reinstitute sacrifices yet again in our future.
I realize this does not match Scofield’s Notes, so you can save yourself the trouble of regurgitating his ideas.
Perhaps you can fill all of us in on Hank Hannegraff's credentials that make him qualified to be "The Bible Answer Man".
Where did he get his theological education?
What degrees does he hold?
What seminaries has he attended?
What classes has he taken in Greek and Hebrew?
What courses has he taken in Ancient History or Culture?
What courses did he take in Biblical Hermeneutics?
Is he even qualified to teach elementary school?
Cute, cute, but you forgot the phrase “and the end thereof” right after “and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”; and before “with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”
That phrase (”at the end of”) makes all the difference in the paragraph because it separates the 69 weeks from the next sentence which speaks of another time period; “one week” and the contract with the people of Jerusalem (historically there has never been discovered a contract or pact with the people of Jerusalem that was broken by Rome before the destruction of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple) which he breaks in the middle of the week. this last week ends with the “consummation” the final end.
Now it can’t be the same time period that Messiah is cut off since that took place in 30 A.D. or the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple since that all took place during the end of the same 69 week period.
It has to be the “prince” since Messiah was cut off (killed) before the sacrifice and worship ceased in the middle of the 70th week.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.