Posted on 11/08/2023 12:11:15 PM PST by Roman_War_Criminal
Note: The following is a most relevant open letter, which is important to all within the Body of Christ to read. Our prayer is that you will read carefully and understand God’s Holy View of Israel in these end times when the Jewish people are again beginning to suffer hatred throughout the world.
Dear Brother or Sister in Christ,
If you are a member of a Catholic or mainline denominational church, you have probably been taught something called replacement theology (and perhaps you don’t even know it has that name). Replacement theology leads those who have adopted it to believe that Israel is no longer God’s people and that the modern regathering of the Jews in their historical land is theologically meaningless. Please know this is an error, and I write this letter to alert you to it so you can study God’s Word and reach your own conclusion.
Replacement theology, sometimes called supersessionism or fulfillment theology, is a doctrine stating either that the Church took Israel’s place as God’s people when Israel rejected Jesus as its Messiah or that the “old” Israel was set aside in favor of a “new” Israel, the Church, upon Jesus’s first coming. No matter how it got there, the Church is now God’s people and the beneficiary of the promises God made Israel in the Old Testament. Consequently, Jacob’s blood descendants have no unique destiny, and modern Israel’s existence has no significance. Because replacement theology is often woven into otherwise sound teachings on redemptive history, many believers aren’t even aware that it is a separate doctrine with its own name.
Nonetheless, replacement theology is enshrined in Catholic dogma and runs rampant in mainline denominations, even among those that otherwise take the Bible seriously.
Replacement theology raises troubling implications about God’s character, not the least of which are: if God revoked his promises to Israel, what keeps him from revoking them again, and does God really change not (as Malachi 3:6 says)? Many who have been taught replacement theology have not considered these implications. Perhaps you have, too, but have dismissed them out-of-hand or rationalized them away, possibly because they are too dreadful to imagine. Unfortunately, ignoring the implications does not make them go away.
Rather than addressing these (and other) broader implications, this letter will instead tackle the assumption that lies at the very heart of replacement theology: did Israel really forfeit its blessings? Did God really forsake or move past Israel? Fortunately, if you read the Bible without bias, it gives a clear answer.
One point is worth making before proceeding: I don’t have the ability or the moral duty to force you to reject replacement theology. Only the Holy Spirit can convict. All I can do is call relevant scripture to your attention and invite you to check it out yourself. That is what I will now do.
To keep this letter short and clear, I will rely only on two passages: Isaiah 6 and Romans 11. (If you are a Reformed believer, you tend to read Revelation figuratively because you have been taught that it is “apocalyptic literature.” I will, therefore, deliberately avoid Revelation’s many passages affirming Israel’s destiny, knowing that you will be unwilling to read Isaiah and Romans figuratively.) I will cite the King James Version, but any good version will do.
Isaiah 6 contains the well-known “Here I am. Send me” passage in which Isaiah volunteers to convey a message God has for his people:
“Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed” (Isaiah 6:8-10).
God informs his people not only that they are hardened (deaf, blind and without understanding), and he is the one hardening them, but also that he has hardened them to delay their repenting and being healed. Note that God does not tell them why he wants a delay.
When the disciples ask Jesus why he speaks “to them” in parables in Matthew 13, he quotes this passage of Isaiah 6:
“He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive” (Matthew 13:11-14).
Paul also quotes this same passage of Isaiah 6 in Acts 28, reminding the local leaders of the Jews that they are hardened.
“And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not. And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them” (Acts 28:24-27).
Paul then discloses the reason why God hardened Israel, delaying its repenting and being healed:
“Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it” (Acts 28:28).
According to Paul, God hardened Israel so the Gospel could be taken to the Gentiles.
However, Isaiah 6 continues after the passage quoted in both Matthew 13 and Acts 28. God has more to say to Isaiah about his people. Returning to Isaiah 6, after hearing God’s decree against his people, the prophet begs God for an answer in verse 11, and God gives it to him:
“Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate. And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But yet in [the land] shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof” (Isaiah 6:11-13).
God promises that he will lift Israel’s partial hardening during or just after a widespread devastation. This may be a great war, even a nuclear war, given the extent and degree of damage. However, it may be a direct act of God, acting in wrath. Only he knows.
Why, then, did Jesus and Paul’s quotations from Isaiah 6 stop short of verses 11-13? The answer is that they were speaking in the First Century. Isaiah 6:11-13 would be fulfilled in the future. They were only talking about Israel’s hardened condition in those days and not about when it would someday repent. Remember, Jesus was only answering a question from his disciples as to why he was teaching in parables, and Paul was only making the case for taking the Gospel to the Gentiles.
Now, let’s look at Romans 11, in which Paul answers the question his earlier chapters in Romans begged: if Christ is the answer and the law is not, what about the Jews, to whom God had given the law? Has God turned his back on Israel?
“I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal” (Romans 11:1-4).
The answer is an emphatic “God forbid!” God will save an elect remnant of Israel, and God will save them by grace, not the law. To keep the Gentiles from feeling superior to the Jews, Paul goes on to say:
“I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” (Romans 11:11-15).
Then, after describing how the holy firstfruits of a lump of dough renders the whole lump holy, how a holy root can render the entire tree holy, and how branches grafted onto a holy tree become holy, even branches that had previously been cut off, Paul reveals a mystery in verse 25:
“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (Romans 11:25).
Though he does not outright quote Isaiah 6:11-13, he affirms the promise God made in those verses to end Israel’s hardening. The mystery Paul reveals is that the partial hardening of Israel’s elect will end when the “fulness of the Gentiles be (has) come in.”
It is important to note that none of these passages are talking about the Church. God has never hardened the Church. He has only hardened Israel, and only temporarily, for the express purpose of taking the Gospel to the Gentiles and building a Church that encompasses all peoples, nations, and languages. This he did at Israel’s great expense, but he will resurrect and magnify Israel because of it. Consider the supreme irony: God hardened Israel to benefit the Gentiles, and so many churches have returned their thanks to Israel by teaching replacement theology.
God’s reply in Isaiah 6 and Paul’s teaching in Romans 11 raise two questions: when will this widespread devastation occur, and when will the fulness of the Gentiles come in? The Bible gives no clear answer; God wants us to depend on him alone for the timing.
However, we can be sure of this – God will restore the elect of his people Israel. That unambiguous Biblical truth, stated explicitly both to Israel in the Old Testament and the Gentiles of the Church in the New Testament, exposes replacement theology as bad doctrine. Now, it’s up to the Holy Spirit and informed believers to purge the Church of this sad error.
If replacement theology now troubles you as much as it does me, please do me a favor. Consider giving a copy of this letter to a brother or sister who has been mistaught. You will be helping them and doing a good work for God’s kingdom.
>>We’re still here.
But we are the descendants of Noah. The rest of mankind suffered collective punishment by drowning, including infants and the unborn children in their mother’s womb.
——>God’s people are those who follow Him.
Correct.
The promises that God made to literal Israel were conditional. Specifically, because of their grievous sins, discussed by Jeremiah, among others, God allowed them to be taken captive to Babylon, and of course many of them were outright killed before they even got there. The worst sins were desecration of the Sabbath and worshipping the sun. God gave them EXACTLY 490 years to atone for their sins and accept Christ as the Messiah. They failed. That is what Daniel’s 70 week prophecy was about. It has absolutely nothing to do with chopping 7 years off and placing it just after the false Pre Trib Rapture fantasy.
Well, you should look up the language of the Old Covenant, because it was CONDITIONAL on obedience. Anything to do with literal Israel is a fairy tale. Literal Jews now have the same chance at salvation as anyone else has, as individuals.
——>“The Covenant with Israel stands.”
Not LITERAL Israel. Those who believe in the false Pre Trib Rapture just can’t understand that. Literal Israel as a corporate entity is history.
Genesis 6:5 The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Genesis 6:11-13 Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth. And God said to Noah, “I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence through them. Behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
Should God not have punished sin or dealt with evil? Exactly how should God have dealt with it then? What way would you approve of him doing it?
AMEN!
Israel is indeed God's chosen people.
Those of us grafted in in addition by faith are also.
It doesn't mean that God has replaced who His chosen people are as if God could only have one chosen people at a time.
And therein lies a great irony.
Jesus himself was Jewish. How can one claim to be a follower of Christ and at the same time hate and reject the Jews?
If Jews accept Christ, what do you call such persons?
“Christians.”
They CANNOT be one. They are legion.
Yes, and beloved for the father's sake: ISRAEL: CHOSEN OR FORGOTTEN?
Actually (contrary to the parroted polemic) the attempted censure by Catholics against private interpretation of Scripture (which Catholics liberally can and do engage in) is nowhere found in Scripture, and their attempt to invoke 2 Peter 1:20 as teaching is an example of the "wresting" of Scripture that Peter condemns in 2 Peter 3:16.
Nor (contrary to the parroted polemic) does private interpretation of Scripture make one a "little pope," except in cults, since rather than presuming any ensured veracity, any claim to veracity must rest upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation.
But Scripture is not the sure supreme standard for faithful Caths anyway, as their church is, and their basis for assurance of doctrine is to the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial veracity as per Rome, at least in salvific matters, versus that of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power. Which is how the NT church began, in contrast to the Roman model, in which "the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," " with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go..." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
Thus distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly God-inspired, substantive, authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels)
Well, without even reading the long article, the conflict I see as regards the place of Israel whether the regathering of Jews today and establishment of the State of Israel is a fulfillment of prophecy, which replacement types reject, along with the further conversion of (what is left) of Israel. Rome has a history of being reluctant to support the establishment of the former (besides past anti-antisemitism, as with Luther also), while affirming the latter. (CCC 674).
Related to this is the rejection of the literal 1,000 reign of Christ, which is well-supported.
First, it’s not really being discussed here how Paul has several warnings here for Christians to be humble and to be first concerned with the genuiness of their own faith. That’s all the more important in this time where the church overall greatly resembles that of Laodicea.
Next, the church has become part of Israel after a manner. Rabbi Jonathan Cahn has warned against America going the idolatrous way of ancient Israel as recorded in Isaiah, for one. Again, all the more reason to examine one’s faith in light of God’s Word to be certain to be part of the remnant in the church.
Also, Paul doesn’t explain exactly why “the fullness of the Gentiles” must come in first. I’m seeking answers from the Lord on it but don’t have them fully yet.
And, too, Paul said he, in effect, tailored his message somewhat to his audience. So to Gentiles, he was concerned about them not seeking to keep the Jewish law. That was his emphasis, as the apostle to them. Acts, for instance, shows a different side to Paul’s views.
Who should we rather trust? Pope FRANCIS???? Just look at his track record. You want HIM interpreting Scripture for you? Or anything else for that matter?
Acts 17:10-12 The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men.
There was no church in Berea yet. Paul and Silas went into a synagogue.
The Jews there did not have some church hierarchy to *interpret* Scripture for them. They read it themselves to see if what Paul and Silas were saying was true, and THEN they believed.
And they were commended for it.
Not condemned as Catholicism does.
I have observed that "former Catholics" have the most egregiously mistaken notions as to what "Catholicism does".
I also observe that you are arguing beside the point. Bergoglio has nothing to do with this; dragging him into it is a Red Herring.
The question is whether or not Mr. James (or any Protestant) holds the definitive teaching authority which he grasps at in his article. Clearly he does not; the very foundation of Protestantism denies it. By Protestant standards, Mr. James has no more (or less) authority to read, interpret, and understand Scripture than you or I.
Do you deny that I, or any other Catholic, have the right to read Scripture for ourselves? The Church recommends that we do so, BTW. Do you claim the right to tell us that our understanding of the Scriptures is "ERROR" should it differ from yours?
I'm talking to you, metmom, not to your posse of followers.
That depends upon a Catholics definition of such past papal teachings as,
*'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
Can. 831 §1. Except for a just and reasonable cause, the Christian faithful are not to write anything for newspapers, magazines, or periodicals which are accustomed to attack openly the Catholic religion or good morals; clerics and members of religious institutes, however, are to do so only with the permission of the local ordinary.
Can. 827§4. Books or other writings dealing with questions of religion or morals cannot be exhibited, sold, or distributed in churches or oratories unless they have been published with the permission of competent ecclesiastical authority or approved by it subsequently.But since TradCaths determine the validity of the authority of leadership based upon their judgment of what past valid teaching is and means, as well as "competent ecclesiastical authority" and "a just and reasonable cause," then they are the little popes, even though they often are right as to what past (even if unscriptural) RC teaching is.
The Jews there did not have some church hierarchy to *interpret* Scripture for them. They read it themselves to see if what Paul and Silas were saying was true, and THEN they believed.
But the Jews did have some church hierarchy to *interpret* Scripture for them. Whose judgment, if consistent with the classic Catholic model for assurance of Truth, it what 1st century souls should have wholly submitted to.
If I believed the damnable gospel of Rome and other false teachings, I also would be a TradCath. Vatican Says Transgender People May Be Baptized 11/9/2023, 9:58:27 AM · by devane617 · 23 replies WSJ ^ | 11/09/2023 The Vatican also said that the children of gay couples, including ones who are adopted or born to surrogate mothers, may be baptized, and that such couples may serve as godparents. The statement, released on Wednesday, helps to clarify Catholic teaching with regard to transgender people, a topic the Vatican has said little about until now.
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.