I do not think I have ever said anything about the Church “replacing Israel”. What a silly notion considering that most of the early Church was made up of ethnic Jews. That Christ brought the gospel to the Jews, many of whom believed. That the apostles worked very hard to break down the wall that separated Jews and gentiles to, as Paul described it, create one new man. That Peter called the Church a “holy nation”, harkening back to God’s description of Israel. That we members of the Church inhabit the “new Jerusalem”. Only a dispensationalist would see this as “replacing Israel” since their view of Israel is quite defective.
We have witnessed God’s covenant faithfulness to Jewish people for the last 2000 years who have embraced Jesus Christ.
Meanwhile, futurist dispensationalists invent theories about modern Israel to fit with their own faulty reading of the Bible. The faults are often big enough to drive a truck through, but rather than deal with the defects, they are content to label their opponents as a way to divert the discussions from the flaws in their theory.
But this is the off-sounded trumpet of dispensationalism; anyone that does not agree with us on Israel vis-à-vis the Church is probably a closet anti-Semite. It’s what happens when you do not have the biblical facts on your side, you just invent boogeyman names to reference your opponent.
It’s a tactic born, not of fact or truth, but desperation. It’s like playing in the race card in politics.
The Replacement Theology “Anti-Semite” Card
No. I am very familiar with desperate “last ditch efforts” to try and stay afloat when your argument is sinking and in mentioning replacement theology, I am in no ways pulling that last ditch effort.
In 1543 Martin Luther wrote a pamphlet called “Concerning the Jews and their Lies.” In a nutshell, he tries to make the case that God threw the Jews away like garbage and tried to make the case the Christians should overpower them and stop them from teaching Judaism. It was a very radical piece that dehumanized them and demonized people of Jewish descent. It was full of hate and made the case to call for vengeance against them. His rage was due to the fact that Jews continued to reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ. At first he was sympathetic to the Jews because he felt that the Jews were in opposition to the ever so evolving corrupt nature of the Catholic Church. But when they still rejected the Gospel regardless of the state of the Catholic Church, Luther totally lost it, as is grossly evident if you read his pamphlet.
An online version of his piece can be found at this link:
http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm
The view that the church replaced Israel was held by the early church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and St. Augustine. Unfortunately their views stemmed from human nature and had nothing to do with spiritual. After all, Christ said that he laid down his life for us by his own accord.
John 10:17-19
17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”
(also see John 15:13)
But people, and in this sense, “Christians” seemed to ignore this passage and took it upon themselves to inflict punishment on the Jews for crucifying Christ and their motivation was most likely on account of their frustrations with them.
Since these early church fathers are highly respected and since prominent religions seem to hold their teachings in high regard, their teachings are still communicated and taught doctrinally. Of course because of tolerance, the strength of antisemitism isn’t as potent as it once was, but anti-semitism still exists.
I know somebody personally who attends my church and believes in replacement theology. In arguing people who hold this view, it prompted me to go into research mode to research the roots of this teaching. That’s why I mentioned it. It seems to parallel on the level of doctrine rather than me just coming out and using tactics of character assassination.
These views are very real and still exist, although they’re watered down by today’s standards. I personally am not a member of religion. Religion is a world system, and is runned much like a bureaucracy in the name of Christ, yet seeking control over people.