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covenants, believing that their spiritual destiny is either to perish or become a part of the new religion that superseded Judaism (whether Christianity or Islam).1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.
***If you can’t bring yourself to answer that question then ask that 5th grade child in your midst. He’s probably smarter than a preterist.***
Like I said, how old are you cause you are REALLY acting juvenile?
“Take the blinders off...Start believing God...”
So when Jesus said He was the “Bread of Life,” should we take that to mean He’s a loaf of bread?
The problem with dispensationalism is that it doesn’t allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Therefore, there is no standard basis for how to understand Scripture and as a result it often takes literally the apocalyptic hyperbole and metaphors and then spiritualizes the literal.
As far as Isaiah 19 and your belief that God literally rode a cloud down to Egypt to show His wrath, the fact is that Isaiah 20 shows that God actually used the Assyrians to show His wrath against Egypt.
Yo, Chipper. Who to this point has not answered you clearly and unequivocally on the nature of Christ’s "coming" in AD70?
Is it poor reading skills that prevent you from getting it? Or is it the dispie glasses that cloud (no pun intended) your comprehension? Or are you just dazzled by your emperor’s splendid wardrobe?
It's a coverup. I think it has to do with inadequacies in handling the Scriptures.
You don't think??? You forgot to read the words: "in the which" in the following:
"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night in the which the heavens shall pass away..."
Kind of like Adam who died not at the beginning of his 1000 year day but at the end of it, but it was still during that 1000 year day of God.
Glad I could help and I was able to do so without asking a 5th grader --
Was the question too tough for you???
I know nothing of his organization, just that he belittles most of the ministries and pastors these days. Not a good thing.
***You don’t think??? You forgot to read the words: “in the which” in the following:
“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night in the which the heavens shall pass away...”
Kind of like Adam who died not at the beginning of his 1000 year day but at the end of it, but it was still during that 1000 year day of God.***
So much for the plain literal meaning of words. It is amazing how quickly Dispensationalists jump off their own bandwagon when they have to defend their theology. Also, in this theology you have invented, you still have to have the thousand years literally be a thousand years. Therefore, the disollution cannot happen until the conclusion of that, yet we have Peter here confessing that it must happen, accoring to you, within that timetable. Ergo, the only time it could happen is at the very end.
So much for coming as a thief in the night.
John to Steve: Better watch out for the coming of the Lord like a thief when the elements melt. We gotta repent first.
Steve: Isn’t he already here in Jerusalem?
John: Maybe it is not a literal coming.
Steve: Maybe we don’t have to literally repent, either.
***Glad I could help and I was able to do so without asking a 5th grader —***
You do realize that everyone around you is laughing at you for the way you are acting.
A football metaphor may help us clarify the three eschatological perspectives:
Oh, man! Can't use metaphor!
As departed mother would likely say . . . QUIET, THE JUDGE WANTS TO SPIT . . .
I see THREE issues [I) SYMBOLIC/LITERAL II) TYPES & FORERUNNERS--BOTH/AND; III) SACRIFICE & MYSTERIES] that folks throw rocks over and about without addressing directly. And, it's not easy nor even likely that addressing the issues directly would bear much fruit given the different Bibles, histories and disctionaries in force . . . nevertheless, I wish to make a comment or three . . . given my lifelong habit of rushing in where angels fear to tread . . .
It is highly unlikely there will be much meeting of the minds--much less the theologies and certainly not the dictioaries on this ball park--at least not very much before the 2nd Coming and likely significantly after that.
My reading of Scripture for 55+ years has left me with the following observations and convictions on such:
1. LITERAL IS BEST. Sometimes it's obvious that the literal meaning alone is intended . . . is sufficient . . . needful . . . required. Counting on that in a prophetic Scripture discussion between Dispies and Replacementarians is a sure sign of delusion or sleep walking or being drunk in The Spirit or something.
2. LITERAL is sometimes mixed with symbolic/figurative in prophetic Scriptures. Haven't counted . . . I'd guesstimate maybe 15-25% of all prophetic verses could be categorized such. I realize that Replacementarians have a compulsion to slam everything into symbolic so such are more easily mangled and otherwise they'd have to believe The Bible but that's another issue.
3. Sometimes things are symbolic, figurative, mysterious virtually totally and only . . . FOR NOW. The Messiah as Suffering Servant has been that way for eons to the Children of Jacob. They perfer the Messiah as Conquering King line of Scriptures [Kind of like Replacementarians are allergic to anything after AD70] and in true schizophrenic fashion . . . as well, we might add, in true knee jerk/meat axe Replacementarian fashion--RATHER THAN TAKE SCRIPTURE AT FACE VALUE AND MERELY NOTE THAT "WE DON'T UNDERSTAND," they have concluded that there must be 2 Messiah figures.
The principle exegetical dogma/practice seems to be--WHEN IN DOUBT . . . run about, shout and SLAM INTO THE SYMBOLIC AND/OR AD70 BOX. Then pontificate ad nauseum with SHRILLERY logic and convolutions about how Biblical and historical and logical it all is when it's literally the OPPOSITE of all 3. But I digress.
God seems to have His reasons for hiding things mysteriously in symbolism OCCASIONALLY--He seems to want us to realize only closer to the event or during or after the event and/or He wants the truly wise and sensitive to His Spirit to ferret out the deeper meanings VIA HOLY SPIRIT and to thereby keep them hidden from the clueless, the enemy etc. His sand box. He has His reasons.
I think many times, SOME FEW wise folks who've lived, breathed, studied The Word IN THE SPIRIT for decades and sometimes less . . . may come up with a Spirit dropped insight that truly illumines a previously obscure prophetic verse or issue. Praise God. Wonderful. Expecting all to jump on the bandwagon and cheer the new revelation is a sure sign of being stuck in Disney's IT'S A SMALL WORLD for farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr toooooooo long. The bloke will be blessed if even some of his own family members agree. And, some of the MORE IN-TUNE WITH GOD folks may realize the merit in the new revelation.
But for Christianity as a whole, it is not ragingly likely to take the bulk of even Pentecostal Christianity by a storm. For all intents and purposes . . . it will remain an obscure footnote unless and until Holy Spirit massively enlightens masses of Christians on the matter--something He seems to be rarely inclined to do. But that could change. He could begin a series of enlightening dreams or daylight visions or simple daily mental/spiritual enlightenments many orders of magnitude above normal . . . he could begin a new program of such any day in these END TIMES for whatever purposes. Not holding my breath.
My own suspicion is that a good chunk of the relatively few symbolic only Scriptures will remain mysterious for most if not all Believers until just prior to their fulfillment or until during or after their fulfillment. Then the lights will go on. We can pontificate, conjecture, assume, extrapolate until the cows come home . . . And Heaven will likely laugh . . . or cry then laugh.
There's a lot of Scriptures with BOTH literal meanings AND symbolic meanings. Pretending that Replacementarians and Dispies are going to agree on such categories etc. this side of the 2nd Coming is another sure sign of delusion or gargantuan faith or parallel universes or something.
Certainly context, the whole of Scripture, logic etc. can help. I'm impressed with Wallvoord's job in a number of cases. He's fair, scholarly, presents all sides and articulates the most plausible Biblical answer well. I like that. But none of that will even scratch the surface of the Replacementarians' Rubber Bibles, Rubber Histories, Rubber Dictionaries, Rubber logic books. Imagining that it will is an exercise in vanity or futility or 'self-mental-massage' or some such. Oh, we should try, nevertheless. Certainly for the lurkers.
But I also believe that there are SOME relatively few Replacementarians who lean HOWEVER SLIGHTLY toward the realm of reason, Biblical truth etc. WHO, WHEN EVENTS ON CNN START MORE VIVIDLY AND MORE ROUTINELY OVERTLY MATCH BIBLICAL PROPHECY SCRIPTURES . . . they might actually waken out of their stupor because of earnest efforts on the part of Holy Spirit through us flawed Dispies.
Whether the light bulbs go on in time to minimize the singes on their long robes as they scurry into the woodlands ahead of the globalist gestapo remains to be seen.
But, while I may respect Jack Van Impe’s work; Hal Lindsey’s work etc. to a point . . . and they have a lot of research and/or scholarship beyond mine . . . too often THEY ARE JUST PERSONALLY PONTIFICATING imho. Their Scriptural support is as shakey and fantasmagorical as the Replacementarians’ routinely is.
I personally TRY to avoid such emphatic statements unless there’s considerable Scriptural support for such. I still see through the glass darkly, too. Yet, Holy Spirit leads us into all truth. Both are true. We do NOT know a LOT more than we emphatically know, by far, imho.
Tempis is Fugeting again . . . whack. Settle down Tempis.
Any Bible reader worth the label should know that the cross in the wilderness with the serpents to look upon and be healed was
A TYPE, A FORERUNNER OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS. That’s not really rocket science to understand that.
Yet, endlessly, hereon, The Replacementarians rave and rant about how this or that prophetic Scripture was 100% absolutely about this or that ridiculous event in AD70.
AT BEST AD 70 and other events before these prophetic END TIMES were mere foreshadowings of what is slated for our era, our DISPENSATION. The movie trailer does NOT EQUAL the movie. The HINT does not EQUAL the secret.
Of course, Dispies should not expect Replacementarians with their rubber Bibles, dictionaries and histories to accurately divide the Word of Truth in terms of what’s foreshadowings and what’s literally predicted to become literally true precisely to the letter etc. Shoot, I doubt many Dispies get a lot of things very PRECISELY accurate. But we should at least get the rough outline reasonably accurate.
At the very least, we ought to know the MAJOR MILE POSTS to watch for with understanding and discernment.
This has long been an area of puzzle and mystery. The wiser in my experience have acknowledged it so. GIVEN CHRIST—why are some Scriptures about future millennial sacrifices even remote Biblical reality? Is it only symbolic ceremony memorializing . . . by then . . . or what?
GOD HASN’T SPELLED IT OUT!
He’s just teased us with some SEEMINGLY mutually exclusive stuff WITHOUT EXPLANATION.
GUESS WHAT—HE’S GOD. RANK HAS ITS PRIVILEGES.
Clearly there WILL BE a 3rd Temple with daily sacrifices that the Anti-Christ will end with his own image in the Holy of Holies. That much is CERTAIN.
But the evidently millennial mention of a sacrifice makes no sense. But the Scriptures are there. Now, Replacementarians just stretch their rubber Bibles this way and that until they have forced ‘reality’ to fit their tidy [actually very untidy but anyway] little boxes and then proudly pretend they have it all figured out.
I think on this score, Dispies are wiser to say—WE DON’T KNOW. God hasn’t made it clear yet. And that’s OK with us because, contrary to Replacementarian compulsions, we don’t need to give God competition playing God.
Anyway—enough—I have other tasks to do and this has taken longer than I intended.
One of the benefits of ruling and reigning with Christ is that I don’t have to answer to the demands of Dispensationalists, whom God is making wait to take up their crown. I will let you polish my boots, though.
“For you, the entire book of Revelation is a metaphor...”
In fact, that’s not true at all.
For example, unlike dispensationalism, preterism does not spiritualize literal words such as “near” to mean “2,000 years from now.”
Preterism takes the temple literally and does not create a futuristic third temple.
Preterism, mindful that Revelation is a letter addressed to the seven persecuted churches that existed at the time, does not change “you” to mean “they.”
Preterism takes “horses” and “bows and arrows” literally rather than spiritualizing them to make them mean “jets” and “bombs.”
Those are examples.
Oh, Is that your problem??? Well Peter clearly says that the day "comes" [begins] as a thief in the night but it ends with a bang.
You do realize that everyone around you is laughing at you for the way you are acting.
And my 5th graders are laughing at the way preterists explain what they read.
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Quiet fingers . . . quiet . . .
Well you can atleast tell us whether that Greek word for "coming" there in Matthew 24:30 means an actual physical coming or not.
Can you help us bootpolishers there with that question???
The Catholics do, but I'm not of that persuasion...
The problem with dispensationalism is that it doesn’t allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Therefore, there is no standard basis for how to understand Scripture and as a result it often takes literally the apocalyptic hyperbole and metaphors and then spiritualizes the literal.
Now that's foolish and it's not accurate at all...
But to claim you compare scripture with scripture when you don't believe the scripture in the first place is going well beyond the limit of logic...
Jesus says He'll show up in a cloud...Maybe He'll show up in a Lear Jet...So what??? But IF that's a metaphor, we won't know what it represents till we see it...So what???
But the important part is we WILL see it...All eyes will see it...The cloud may, or may not be a metaphor, but, 'All eyes will see Him', is definitely NOT a metaphor...But you want to turn the entire verse into a metaphor, which it isn't...
To suggest that Jesus showed up in 70 AD 'in the Spirit', and then to claim you compare scripture with scripture is ludicrous...
As far as Isaiah 19 and your belief that God literally rode a cloud down to Egypt to show His wrath, the fact is that Isaiah 20 shows that God actually used the Assyrians to show His wrath against Egypt.
No, the fact is God said he will ride on a cloud and visit Egypt personally, physically...
Whatever is going on in chapter 20 is something else then...
Look at all the scripture you are rejecting along with rejecting God showing up physically...
Isa 19:5 And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up
Isa 19:17 And the land of Judah shall be a terror unto Egypt, every one that maketh mention thereof shall be afraid in himself, because of the counsel of the LORD of hosts, which he hath determined against it.
Isa 19:24 In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land:
Isa 19:25 Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.
These things and many of the other things in this chapter have not taken place, yet...
There may be some history here, but there's a ton of prophecy as well...And it didn't take place in 70 AD...
I can't imagine how much of the scripture you have to reject to make some of it fit your theology...
And you compare scripture with scripture??? You don't have much scripture to compare...
Maybe you need to rephrase the question...It could be complicated, to some...
***Well you can atleast tell us whether that Greek word for “coming” there in Matthew 24:30 means an actual physical coming or not.***
Are you asking for my expert opinion on a proper Greek translation for “erchomenon” (transliterated) and an examination of all uses of “erchomai?”
I'm not sure if a poll has ever been taken on the subject of who get "belittled" by Hanegraaff, but CRI has always been known as a watchdog ministry. There are many woves among the sheep.
“I realize you must still be struggling with the issues I raised in post #734”
There is no struggle. It is a masculine noun derived from the word meaning to cover or conceal. Over 3/4th of the time it is used for the pillar of cloud that led Israel, but it is never used in the preterist sense of a company of men in the Old Testament. It is used mostly as a representation of the awesome presence/glory of God when not as weather or metaphors for the gossamer nature of things. The Jews at the time of Christ would have recognized its use as representating the glory as in Matthew 23:39, “For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord”; not some obscure “you will see me in the pagan hordes coming to destroy the temple”.
So now answer the questions:
How do you reconcile Matthew 23:39 with 24:30 and 26:64?
If Israel and the priests in particular did not recognize the destruction of the temple as the judgment of God for their rejection of Messiah how did they “see” him in the pagan hordes and of what value is the punishment to those who did not recognize it as punishment?
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.