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covenants, believing that their spiritual destiny is either to perish or become a part of the new religion that superseded Judaism (whether Christianity or Islam).1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.
I personally don't think Preterists are evil or even spreading any kind of pernicious doctrine. I think preterists are wrong.
I do not believe that any eschatological system is fundamental to the gospel. Christ promised he would return. That is something we can look forward to. But the fact of the matter is that every believer will meet Jesus within a nanosecond of leaving this earth, so Jesus has been meeting us in the air for the last 2000 years and he will continue to meet us there until he gathers his elect and yanks them all into his presence in the twinkling of an eye.
Most preterists here think that dispensationalists like me are a menance to the church. Indeed, just read their taglines. They are obsessive about this subject and when they find themselves ganged up on on one thread and losing the debate miserably, they start a new thread and post another essay by Gary DeMar (whom I think very well may be a poster here) which ultimately gets torn apart and the process begins all over again, and again, and again and again.
i MOMSTLY agree.
Except that I do believe that the Contrarian Preterist/Replacementarian heresies
ARE
destructive in that
1. they prevent some believing Scripture and in Jesus because they prevent appreciation of the convincing power of fulfilled prophecy leading them to Christ.
2. they prevent proper preparation of heart, mind, soul and substance for at least the birth pangs of the looming traumas.
I believe there’s another destructiveness . . .
3. they flatter the Replacementarian mentality that flesh driven, . . . and worse . . . driven; Bible mangling; history mangling; logic mangling; Spirit ignoring constructions on reality take arrogant precedent over solid Bible and God’s perspective and will. That is spiritually destructive to the folks engaging in such—as well as to those looking up to them and influenced by them—resulting in destructivenesses 1 & 2 above for those in their circle of influence . . . as well, likely as this #3.
And,
4. When looming events REALLY start tumbling down around the ears of everyone—at least leading up to the beginning of the Great Tribulation and certainly during . . . when folks see their flawed constructions on reality bear no meaningful, valid, functional connection any longer to daily reality—it can rock if not shatter major chunks of their faith in general. That’s certainly destructive.
I don’t recall ever reading of a group of believers ever before
who so persistently and so . . . aggressively asserted that God was crazy and ignorant if He didn’t agree with THEIR CONSTRUCTION ON GOD’S WORD! . . . constructions routinely and chronically 180 degrees out from what God said in multiple places.
Mind boggling.
And they seem to think they are doing God’s work and will in such rubber bouncing craziness. Kind of reminds me of another prophecy in Scripture.
Well he must have either escaped or is out on parole because he is sure having a good time deceiving the Preterists and Amillenialists.
What you mean is that it is difficult for you to exegete your way around those troublesome scriptures like this:
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: And this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." [I John 4:2-3]
Let's be clear on your Preterist position:
1] While Dispensationalists believe in two comings for Jesus [26 AD and yet future], Preterists of all stripes believe in three comings [26 AD, 70 AD, and yet future].
2] While Dispensationalists believe that the first and the future second coming of Jesus was and will be "in the flesh" [physical] comings, Preterists contend that though the first coming was "in the flesh" [physical], the second coming in 70 AD was NOT "in the flesh" [and they take this position because there is no evidence that Jesus came in 70 AD but by saying that he came ethereally, then they can try to avoid the evidentiary rule].
3] And as far as the third coming yet future, though Preterists say that it will be in the flesh [physical], their description of this yet future coming bears little physical resemblance to the yet future "in the flesh" coming that Dispensationalists describe. The Preterist yet future third coming is merely for the purpose of closing up shop here on earth and heading back to heaven with the remnants. This is hardly a physical coming at all when compared to the physical coming of Dispensationalism.
4] Dispensationalists confess that Jesus Christ "cometh in the flesh" in all His comings, past and future and they are solid hard core comings. Preterists, on the other hand, confess NOT that Jesus Christ "cometh in the flesh" in all His comings -- only his first and third comings, and that third one is so mushy and ethereal that it is barely physically recognizable. They have split His second coming into two and ethereallized them away to the point of almost complete denial.
"And this is that spirit of antichrist"
-- and Preterists claim that Satan is bound and not deceiving the nations anymore??? They all need to go take a hard [not ethereal] look in the mirror before it is too late for them.
“It doesn’t say ‘clan’ it says ‘family’.”
I was using the NIV translation. Are you saying the NIV is not a correct translation? Any credible Bible scholar would disagree with you, including my uncle who translated Scripture for a living. “Family” and “clan” have the same meaning.
“Moreover, that very verse contradicts what you are trying to push since the Jews didn’t mourn for Christ as an only son when he appeared over Jerusalem.”
I’m not trying to push anything. I’m trying to interpret Scripture in light of Scripture. It’s dispensationalism that’s trying to push something that’s unbiblical. You weren’t there and neither was I. Jesus told Caiaphus that he would “see the Son of Man coming on the clouds” (Mark 16:62). Do you really think Caiaphus is still waiting around to see Him?
We can only go by Scripture. Scofield’s notes is not a good way to arrive at the truth.
The NIV says “trumpet call of God.” To my reading, that does not imply a “secret rapture.”
Yes, their bibles remove the word 'up' from Acts 1:11, so Jesus didn't go up into heaven.
According to the modern scholars, heaven isn't up.
This occurs after the Lord returns to set up His Millennial Kingdom.
Well that sure explains why they don't know which way is "up", and why they think that this fallen world is "heaven on earth".
I have heard of hyperbole, but not Apocalyptic hyperbole.
Moreover, Ezek.5:9 is not hyperbole, it is the fulfillment of the curses of the Palestinian covenant as stated in Lev.26 and Deut.28
Ezek speaks to the fact that Jewish People would be cursed for 3,000 years and while Gentile nations are destroyed, the Jews still continue as a people.
Thus, their symbol of a burning bush, burning, but never consumed.
This type of judgment would never be seen again in history, where an entire people were considered an example to the nations for God's wrath (Deut.29:24-28)
Deut 28: 37 And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the LORD shall lead thee.
Daniel says what was true when considered in light of the judgment given out to wicked Gentile cities, such as Sodom and Gomorrah (Lam.4:6)
LOL!
I was using the NIV translation. Are you saying the NIV is not a correct translation? Any credible Bible scholar would disagree with you, including my uncle who translated Scripture for a living. “Family” and “clan” have the same meaning.
I am saying exactly that!
The NIV is a corrupt version.
[ “Moreover, that very verse contradicts what you are trying to push since the Jews didn’t mourn for Christ as an only son when he appeared over Jerusalem.” ]
I’m not trying to push anything. I’m trying to interpret Scripture in light of Scripture. It’s dispensationalism that’s trying to push something that’s unbiblical. You weren’t there and neither was I. Jesus told Caiaphus that he would “see the Son of Man coming on the clouds” (Mark 16:62). Do you really think Caiaphus is still waiting around to see Him?
Did the Jewish people convert as it says in Zech 12:10 or not?
Stop jumping around trying to avoid the scriptures.
Now as for Caiaphus, what Christ told him was that he would see Him sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven(Mk.14:62)
Note the comma between the two events, first Christ sits and then He returns and in between that we have waited 2,000 years.
Caiaphus will see Christ sitting on the right hand of power, when he is judged by Christ at the great white throne judgement
I checked the NIV and they have 'and' and leave out the comma.
We can only go by Scripture. Scofield’s notes is not a good way to arrive at the truth.
And either is the NIV or any modern version.
The NIV says “trumpet call of God.” To my reading, that does not imply a “secret rapture.”
That is why the correct translation is 'trump' not trumpet, and you will note in that verse that there are voices, we see the Lord descending with a shout, the voice of the archangel and the 'trump' of God is His voice as well,(Rev.4:1) it is not the sound of any trumpets.
“Apocalyptic hyperbole” can be the fallback position of knaves and scoundrels and the lazy.
If something doesn’t fit just call it hyperbole, symbolism, metaphor, etc.
They could only be saved as all before the cross could be saved, by faith in the unseen. IOW, faith that God the Father would not abandon them and he didn't he sent his Son to pay the price none could.
Hebrews 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
The surviving eleven Apostles did not understand the enormity of what Jesus did until the resurrected Jesus appeared to them. They had no special belief, or faith.
Mark 16:14-16 Later he appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
The Apostles were ordinary flawed people like us. Despite seeing all the miracles they didn't "get it" until after the resurrection. If they did truly understand they would have followed Jesus to the Cross and been on a Cross as well.
It seems this is the dividing line between dispensationalism and premillenialism. As a premill, I believe everyone from all ages has had the same criteria applied to them for justification. You are either righteous, or you have Faith in Jesus.
I personally don't think Preterists are evil or even spreading any kind of pernicious doctrine.
You personally may not but we've seen plenty of heated rhetoric from certain others of your camp, easily enough to match the heated rhetoric from this side.
Every careless word, man, every careless word.
I do not believe that any eschatological system is fundamental to the gospel.
By and large, yes. Jesus will return, the dead will be raised, God will judge the living and the dead. These will happen and are yet future. Hold to that, well and good. You can keep your Larkin charts, I'll ask the occasional impertinent question from the sidelines.
I do think dispensationalism has gospel implications, from the way it splits Jew and Gentile. Not everyone, maybe even not that many, takes it that far, I am aware. (Quix, to his credit, repudiated a particularly egregious example that I dug up.) But it is inherent in the system. That's what I think is important to address. Should I let it go without comment?
Consider: You're aware of the John Hagee controversy, right? Do you find what he said as jarring as I do? Could his comments have come from any camp other than dispensationalism?
(And by the way, we're not all preterists.)
If this is true than you are saying that the Saints have thrones and are able to judge in Heaven.
Rev. 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them and judgment was committed to them.
Also, I don't think you should be putting premil and dispensationalism together as though they are one and the same. I don't believe God is done with the Jews and Israel, or that the millennial reign has begun. However, if disepensationalism believes that there are different criteria for justification in different eras I do not believe that.
The NIV is not a translation...It's a paraphrase...
And if 'family' and 'clan' mean the same thing, why change family to clan???
I think that objectivity about something you have put a great deal of time and study into is very difficult. Especially, if during that course of study you have come to a position on that topic. In the end we are not arguing about justification by Grace Alone through Faith Alone, but are seeking discernment of the end times and the signs that indicate their imminent coming.
We have to remember (me included) that these same FRiends we are arguing with today are the ones we stand with when we argue against works based justification, or exculsivist sects.
If dispensationalism is a way of looking at history broken into varying periods I don't see how anyone can get bent out of shape. However, if it is a belief that during these different periods different criteria for salvation were applied, I do see the threat. If the latter is the case, what stops the anti-christ from convincing people a new dispensation has begun and in it salvation is found in a new world religion where we worship the beast (we just don't realize it's the beast).
Please don't assume I'm a postmill, amill, preterist. I'm not. I believe we are in the premil period and God is not done with the Jews and Israel.
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.