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covenants, believing that their spiritual destiny is either to perish or become a part of the new religion that superseded Judaism (whether Christianity or Islam).1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.
***Maybe it’s my fever....***
Do I get a vote?
“Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I [Paul] also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, the tribe of Benjamin” [Romans 11:1]”
And continuing:
Romans 11:2-5 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: “Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me”? And what was God’s answer to him? “I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” so too, at the present time there is a REMNANT chosen by grace.
Whom do you think Elijah was speaking about when he said “they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars”?
UNBELIEVING Jews. They perished. Their bloodline didn’t save them. Only the believers were saved.
So, of course, God did not cast away His people, the remnant of believing Jews, which later included a remnant of believers of all nations, in Christ.
“My goodness, you sound like a Roman Catholic appealing to a Church Father!”
I’m sure you must know who Martin Luther was, but that remark doesn’t sound like you do.
“The Temple that is described in Matthew is not the Lord’s Body since no abomination of desolation can stand in it!”
That’s obvious. It was the temple that was still standing, not a “future third temple” mentioned only in the sensationalized, yet nonbiblical books written by the likes of people such as LaHaye and Lindsey.
Again, the physical temple was destroyed because Christ is the Temple.
not a chance.
No Gentile was ever under the Law -- only Jews.
The 'church' gets Raptured out to take her part as the Bride of Christ...The wedding takes place in Heaven...
'This' is at the end of the Great Tribulation just before Jesus returns...
The bible strongly hints at a limited mid-Tribulation Rapture and a limited post-Tribulation Rapture as well...This is called the First Resurrection...
Any one who did not get saved before the Rapture is complete, will not be a part of the Bride of Christ...
Those who are 'saved' after the Rapture (Jews and Gentiles alike) will go on into the Millennium and live and reproduce for a thousand years...On earth...With Jesus Christ sitting on the physical Throne of David in Jerusalem as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords...
At the Great White Throne Judgment, these 'Christians' will be judged on their faith as well as their works...
He casts away unbelievers, Esau was a prime example of that. He’s still mad at him
place, any portion or space marked off, as it were from surrounding space
an inhabited place, as a city, village, district a place
(passage) in a book metaph.
the condition or station held by one in any company or
assembly opportunity, power, occasion for acting
In fact, truth be told, there's an abomination set up there now, and a third temple will just be another.
Somebody claiming to be a Christian and the head of Christianity on earth is another. Lots of examples past, present and future
“Luke is talking about the events of 70AD, Matthew isn’t.”
Luke 21:32: “I tell you the truth, THIS generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
Matthew 24:34: “I tell you the truth, THIS generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”
Jesus said “this” generation in Luke when He was speaking about what was going to happen in 70 AD, which makes perfect sense.
So in Matthew why did Jesus not say “that” generation will not pass away if He was speaking about what was going to happen 2,000 years later? Why did He still say “this”?
What’s more, how did His disciples take “this” to mean “this” in one sentence and “this” to mean “that” in another?
I believe you know the answer to those questions.
“No where does scripture say that the “holy place” has to be a temple.”
Actually, I believe you’re right on that. Jerusalem was known to the Jews as the “holy city.”
Quote from Charles Spurgeon (1888): “This portion of our Saviour’s words appears to relate solely to the destruction of Jerusalem. As soon as Christ’s disciples saw “the abomination of desolation,” that is, the Roman ensigns, with their idolatries, “stand in the holy place,” they knew that the time for their escape had arrived; and they did flee to the mountains.” (Matthew: The Gospel of the Kingdom. . p. 215).
Could even be the “Holy Land” Israel. Imagine that
Christ said 'this' generation in Matthew because He was referring to the generation He was talking about, the one that was going to deal with the anti-Christ.
What’s more, how did His disciples take “this” to mean “this” in one sentence and “this” to mean “that” in another? I believe you know the answer to those questions.
Yes, I know the answer to the question based on what the passages say.
Matthew is speaking of a future generation and Luke to the current one.
Since the disciples didn't see the abomination of desolation put into the Temple, but did see armies surrounding them, they knew what warning to heed, the one dealing with the destruction of Jerusalem.
In fact, God didn't even want Paul returning to Jerusalem, he was done with that city-for now.
But no abomination of desolation ever stood in the temple of 70AD and nor did all the tribes see Christ when He returned to save the city-that was going to happen in the future (Matthew 24:30)
And you know the answer to that question but refuse to see the truth.
The passage in Daniel makes it clear that sacrifices had restarted and then are stopped.
Now, if it isn't an actual Temple, it has to at least represent one, such as David's tabernacle did.
Somebody claiming to be a Christian and the head of Christianity on earth is another. Lots of examples past, present and future
None of whom have ever placed an abomination of desolation into the Jewish temple and defiled it.
We also have the passages in 2Thess that state that the anti-Christ enters into the Temple of God claiming to be God (2Thess.2)
I’m sure you must know who Martin Luther was, but that remark doesn’t sound like you do.
Yes, he was a man who taught Sola Scriptura
So, if he can't prove what he says from scripture, I ignore him.
[ “The Temple that is described in Matthew is not the Lord’s Body since no abomination of desolation can stand in it!” ]
That’s obvious. It was the temple that was still standing, not a “future third temple” mentioned only in the sensationalized, yet nonbiblical books written by the likes of people such as LaHaye and Lindsey.
Since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in that temple of 70AD a stubborn fact that you keep tripping over.
Again, the physical temple was destroyed because Christ is the Temple
No one is talking about why the Temple of 70AD was destroyed so don't try to change the subject.
The question is, is that Temple the same one of 70AD and the answer is-no it is not, since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in it.
So, you can keep twisting and turning, but you can't change that fact.
That is pure nonsense, for Jesus in Luke said "when you see the armies surrounding Jerusalem, then flee". The Roman armies let anyone out of Jerusalem who wanted to come out until the actual siege began -- then it was too late. Those who waited until the Roman armies had entered the city were all either slaughtered or sold into slavery -- none of them ever fled to the mountains. So these were not/are not the same event. The abomination of desolation is still future --
Amen.
[Was the Garden of Eden a unique period of time in the bible? Yes or no will suffice.]
Yes. It was unique because the human race under Adam was STILL sinless and actually walked with God in the garden in the cool of the evening. After sin entered in, the convenants began that define the different dispensations God has used to bring man to the knowledge of Him and His Christ which will culminate in the 1000 year rule of Jesus Christ on the earth after the seven year period of tribulation. Bible beleivers read the bible and believe all of it , religionists rationalize the bible and believe what they want.
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days' (Dan.12:11)
Now that sounds like 70AD alright!
Imagine actually going to the passage that the Lord is speaking about in Daniel.
No, it is better to run to Luther, Spurgeon and Strongs to avoid dealing with the truth.
Look up in your concordance “this generation” and you will find that every time “this generation” is used, it means the generation living presently. Then look up “that generation” and you will find that God only said “that generation” when He meant a generation at a different time.
You’re telling me that “this” means “this” in Luke but “this” means “that” in Matthew. Your answer is as intellectually dishonest as Clinton’s “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.
BTW, if you knew anything about the Roman empire, you would know that Roman soldiers carried graven images of Ceasar with them and worshipped that image.
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.