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covenants, believing that their spiritual destiny is either to perish or become a part of the new religion that superseded Judaism (whether Christianity or Islam).1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.
***Jesus says He’ll show up in a cloud...Maybe He’ll show up in a Lear Jet...***
Somehow, I had images of Benny Hinn getting out of his plane fashionably dressed for circa 30 A.D. sporting his Jerusalem shoes with the music to “How great thou art” blaring and waving his hands back and forth slaying everyone in sight.
Do you Dispensationalists think that the Holy Spirit was so casual with what he inspired? If that is the case, then you might as well discard your Bible. It could, after all, mean just about anything.
You are ruling and reigning with Christ???
Sure -- I think it is relevant to the discussion. How many times is it used in the NT and how many of those times does it mean a non-physical coming???
***You are ruling and reigning with Christ???***
Absolutely. I am a king and a priest.
Well when did the Wedding, and the Wedding Supper take place???
Exactly --
For He said unto them: "Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say: "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord". [Mt 23:39]
Who said that and when did they say it or did they forget to say it there in 70 AD???
And I but a lowly boot polisher in his imaginary kingdom. Please pass me another pair of boots, Sire!!!
***For He said unto them: “Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say: “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord”. [Mt 23:39]
Who said that and when did they say it or did they forget to say it there in 70 AD???***
Oh, good grief. You do know what the Lord is making reference to, don’t you??? I hope so anyway.
Cite your reference verse, please.
There must be since you are still trying to justify your odd position based on Hebrew vs. Greek, masculine vs. feminine, and since you have no answer the fact that the Septuagint used the feminine Greek to translate the masculine Hebrew. Do you have a thought, or will you just brush it aside? It seemed so important to you at the time.
So now answer the questions: How do you reconcile Matthew 23:39 with 24:30 and 26:64?
That’s a new question which I’m happy to answer.
As I have demonstrated, and as most Bible scholars realize, Jesus’ use of the phrase "coming in clouds" comes from the OT and is a symbolic phrase that can be used to describe God’s coming in temporal judgment against a nation.
The burden against Egypt. Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud, And will come into Egypt; The idols of Egypt will totter at His presence, And the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst. (Isaiah 19:1)We see a similar use in the NT prophecy.
Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle. … So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped. (Rev. 14:14,16)Is Revelation 14:14 speaking of the second coming, or something else? Is the "son of man" literally visible to the dweller on the earth in this cloud vision? Does He literally thrust a literal sickle in the literal earth? The context does not seem to support that conclusion.
So we see from the Bible that God often uses the imagery of the "clouds of heaven" for a place of authority and judgment.
So when we get to Matthew 23, 24 and 26, we know Jesus is using a familiar pattern to teach the Jews, and not some new futurist invention. When Jesus confronts the high priest in Matthew 26 and tells him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven," to whom was He speaking? When He said "you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven" was He really speaking about someone else (since the high priest in question would be long dead according to the futurist interpretation)? Jesus was obviously using the exact same language found in Daniel 7:13,14 to describe His ascension to the Father and the coming judgment upon unbelieving Israel that all happened within "this generation" in the first century.
Is that what you call exegesis?
Oh please, Sire, don't make us beg for your interpretation.
Please pass another pair of boots.
“The Catholics do, but I’m not of that persuasion...”
First of all, you’re misrepresenting Catholicism too.
You take other metaphors literally. Why not that one? You don’t know why and that’s the problem.
You’ve made a lot of accusations that are unfounded, such as preterists don’t believe in scripture, which you know is pure nonsense.
So maybe you should patrol dispensationalist threads instead; I’m sure you’ll find some on FR.
Where is Jesus right now?
Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, (Heb. 8:1, cf. Eph. 1:20)And where are those who are "in Christ" seated right now?For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. (1 Cor. 15:25)
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. (Eph. 2)You do the math.
For your naked emperor?
You know, Chipper, we would take you more seriously if you adopted a position of than that of your one-note friend and actually exegeted some Scripture to show you know what you are talking about.
Surely, the Dispy’s really do know what this is a reference to, don’t they? “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” They can’t be THAT ignorant of Scripture.
But, Topper, "exegesis" is exactly your problem. Jesus never said to "exegete" His Word. He said to "believe it". Your "exegeses" of His Word make it "unbelievable".
The verses from Acts 19 show a God-ordained pattern. Where the word of God is preached, God's grace finds its target.
And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed." -- Acts 19:17-20"And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.
As Calvinists, we acknowledge that only those names covered by the blood of Christ, ordained and purposed and determined and predestined by God from before the foundation of the world according to His good pleasure alone and not based on anything inherent within those individuals or any "fee will" choice to believe, will be saved. Election is by grace alone, and not by works which includes even our "good work of faith."
So agreeing on this, we ask ourselves what is God's plan in this world? Is it to save only a few; or is it to keep on bringing in the sheep who will eventually outnumber the wolves?
What did the word of God do? It "grew mightily." And it "prevailed."
I don't think God intends for Christianity to fail. I think God intends for Christianity to succeed and prevail. Here's a short and succinct understanding why premils and amils seem to be giving up the game before the whistle blows...
The next question pertains to the earthly success of this kingdom. Will the kingdom Christ established be successful in history? Will the promised Seed of Abraham really be a blessing to the nations? Will Christians experience success in carrying out Christ's commission to bring the nations under the discipline of God's law? The answers to these questions constitute the only significant difference between the amillennial and the postmillennial positions. In reality, amillennialism is only a type of pessimistic postmillennialism. The amillennialist does not believe that the world as a whole will be discipled. They believe a few from every tribe and nation will be saved, but do not believe that the power of the gospel will result in a "golden age" in history...""...Christ's millennial kingdom (the time between the first and second advent of Christ) will last an indeterminate, but perfect, amount of time.
If you have the time, read North's take here online free...
Jesus never said to fly in an airplane either, but it is useful for getting to your destinction.
But I get what you are saying. You can't do it, so your are satisfied to just pooh-pooh it when others do it.
"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39)
"Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so." (Acts 17:10,11)
Your "exegeses" of His Word make it "unbelievable".
Only to those who have nothing useful to compare it against.
And your emperor still is not wearing any clothes.
Is it the masculine gender in Hebrew? Now, where does it say in the Old Testament that they will “see the Lord riding on a swift cloud”? God says He does ride, not that they will see Him and they experience the effects of His judgment just as they experience the presence of God in the Pillar of Cloud. They know when the judgment comes that it is from God because He told them. But in Matthew that is not what Jesus said. He said you will see me coming. They did not see him coming in 70 A.D, so what is the point of telling them something they won’t see or recognize?
“Jesus was obviously using the exact same language found in Daniel 7:13,14 to describe His ascension to the Father and the coming judgment upon unbelieving Israel that all happened within “this generation” in the first century.”
So then the “cloud” in Daniel was not an army but the glory of God, His presence. Now, where in the context of Daniel 7 is there mention of the judgment of “unbelieving Israel”? This prophecy is a reference to Psalm 110, ruling over the heathen, not a judgment of Israel. It is the writer of Hebrews “sit on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstools”.
So in Matthew 23:39 he didn’t really mean they wouldn’t see him again until he came in his glory because in Matthew 24 and 26 he said they would see him again in judgment around 70 A.D. but, they would not recognize he was coming in judgment because he was going to come in the guise of the terror of Rome to accomplish this.
Which is more believable, Jesus coming for His bride in the air without telling every one that they will see Him, before He wreaks judgment or His telling Israel they will see Him but they don’t because He comes disguised as Rome and they don’t know He came and they don’t know the temple was destroyed because of their unbelief? Oh, and every thing is getting better, even the cloning of humans.
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.