Replacement/Supersessionism Theology,Why it Matters

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
G

Gr8grace

Guest
Matthew 16:18 (KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Notice, I Will Build my Church, NOT I have been building my Church? ...Another distinction.
Its the future active indicative of "will build my Church."


oikodomew 3618 fut act ind 1s ---verb *I will build
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
Matthew 16:18 (KJV) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Notice, I Will Build my Church, NOT I have been building my Church? ...Another distinction.
Church just means congregation. There's nothing in the word that makes it distinct from Israel.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,783
3,684
113
Perhaps, or does? Jesus made the new covenant with Israel, not the 'church'. And it was made before the new birth.

Furthermore, the spiritual realm that you call the church, where no distinctions are made, has names associated with it that are clearly specific to Israel, eg, the Jerusalem above, and the heavenly Zion. Sounds more specific to Israel than the nations.
The promise of the New Covenant was a prophesy which began to unfold at Pentecost and as Paul disclosed the mystery included the Gentiles.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
The promise of the New Covenant was a prophesy which began to unfold at Pentecost and as Paul disclosed the mystery included the Gentiles.
But the new covenant was made with Israel, and gentiles weren't invited to partake of the blessings of that covenant for at least 3 years after Pentecost.

So I don't really know what your point is.
 

prove-all

Senior Member
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
64
But the new covenant was made with Israel, and gentiles weren't invited to partake of the blessings of that covenant for at least 3 years after Pentecost.

So I don't really know what your point is.
I have no idea what this babble is, bible verses please
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,783
3,684
113
Are you denying that he hasn't been building his congregation for the past 2000 years?
There is a distinction you refuse to admit. You need to explain, I WILL BUILD, not me. If He has been building it all along it would have been redundant and contradictory to fact.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,783
3,684
113
But the new covenant was made with Israel, and gentiles weren't invited to partake of the blessings of that covenant for at least 3 years after Pentecost.

So I don't really know what your point is.
Wouldn't matter if it was 30 years after, Paul disclosed that the believing Gentiles were included.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
Bible reductionism does not help your case.
The names of the 12 specific tribes were named and in the next verse all tribes and nations. By conveniently ignoring the tribes of Israel you attempt to mush them together with all. Different passages uses different names even Dan, the point is they all belong to Israel.
LOL what a good example of Bible reductionism BY YOU. The exact numbers from each tribe named were given. Dan is excluded. There is no honest way in which you can make them include Dan. If you are right God has excised Dan from Irsael.

James 1.1 called the church 'the twelve tribes of Israel (had his letter been aimed at Jews he would necessarily have informed them how to behave towards Gentile Christians). Jesus said that His disciples would rule over 'the twelve tribes of Israel', namely the church. The use of 12 x 12 and of 144,000 as numbers for the New Jerusalem (the bride of Christ) confirm what John was saying here in Rev 7. As Paul said in the church there is neither Jew nor Greek. And the church is undoubtedly in mind in Rev 7 which in fact is describing the situation from 1st century AD onwards. It is only your fanciful interpretations that avoid that. So the 144000 undoubtedly include the whole church as numbered and sealed by God.


I covered Rev 21 yesterday where the 12 tribes names are on the gates and the 12 apostle names are on the foundations of the New Jerusalem the eternal city.
So the New Jerusalem is the whole church including Old and New Testament saints.

The distinction still stands.
yes between the Old and New Testaments. Pre-Christ Israel (OT believers) and post-Christ Israel (NT believers)

Revelation 7:4-9 (HCSB)
4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:
As Eph 1.13; 4.30 make clear the sealed of God are the church of Christ. As seen above (e.g. James 1.1) 'the twelve tribes' means the church to NT believers.

If it is literal it is in error. It does NOT include every tribe of the sons of Israel. Rather it is parabolic.

5 12,000 sealed from the tribe of Judah, 12,000 from the tribe of Reuben, 12,000 from the tribe of Gad,
6 12,000 from the tribe of Asher, 12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali, 12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh,
7 12,000 from the tribe of Simeon, 12,000 from the tribe of Levi, 12,000 from the tribe of Issachar,
8 12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun, 12,000 from the tribe of Joseph, 12,000 sealed from the tribe of Benjamin
.

where oh where is Dan. ? The list does not include every tribe.


9 After this I looked, and there was a vast multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language, which no one could number, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were robed in white with palm branches in their hands.
Yes this is explaining who the 144,000 represent, the whole church of Jesus Christ which will be gathered out of all Christians through the centuries.
Revelation 21:12, 14 (KJV)
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
yes the believers among the twelve pre-Christian tribes of Israel and the believers among the church founded on the Apostles. The gates allowed in the Old Testament believers from the twelve tribes, the foundation was the Apostles who represented the church of the Messiah. The wall of the New Jerusalem (the bride of Christ) is 144,000. A clear interpretation of Rev 7
 
Last edited:

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,783
3,684
113
You know, you all can believe your Replacement Theologies if you want, all I ask is you don't act like the dispensational view is filled with dunderheads.
I'm done for now.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
You know, you all can believe your Replacement Theologies if you want, all I ask is you don't act like the dispensational view is filled with dunderheads.
I'm done for now.
I don't believe in replacement theology. I believe God founded Israel so that the true believers among them would be His people, that from the beginning He welcomed in Gentile proselytes, and that that Israel CONTINUED in the true believers of the days of the Apostles and afterwards. The true Israel never ceased worshipping God and the Messiah. That is the message of Rom 9-11.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
You know, you all can believe your Replacement Theologies if you want, all I ask is you don't act like the dispensational view is filled with dunderheads.
I'm done for now.
IMO you're the one who advocates a replacement theology that robs Israel its promises and turns them over to the church.

I think dispensational theology is dunderheaded.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
Originally Posted by HeRoseFromTheDead
Are you denying that he hasn't been building his congregation for the past 2000 years?
There is a distinction you refuse to admit. You need to explain, I WILL BUILD, not me. If He has been building it all along it would have been redundant and contradictory to fact.
Why? Christ has been and is building His church on the foundation of Himself and the Apostles. See Matt 28.19-20. That IS the fact.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Would someone please ask herose to stop hijacking and arguing in this thread? He blocked me before and now is taking over the thread. He's had his say. Since I cant ask him to stop I would ask someone reading this to do so for me. Thank you.
I don't like what he is saying either; but, since he is defending replacement theology, as distasteful as that is; he is not off topic.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
There is a distinction you refuse to admit. You need to explain, I WILL BUILD, not me. If He has been building it all along it would have been redundant and contradictory to fact.
He said I will build before Pentecost, at which point he began building the Israel that will last forever.
 
B

Biblelogic01

Guest
Israel were scattered as a consequence of the exile. True believers were gathered back to Palestine in the period that followed the return from exile so that by the time of Jesus Christ 'Jews' from all the tribes were back in the land


which was what happened after the exile between 538 BC and 1 AD
.


in terms of ethnicity it is doubtful if there is one Westerner who is not a Jew, that is has Jewish blood in their veins. Through the centuries Jews have intermarried with Gentiles resulting in the spreading of the Jewish bloodline.

Very few if any Jew in modern Israel can prove their bloodline. Indeed in allowing peoples to become Israelites not much emphasis has been placed on bloodline as no evidence could be produced.

The Israelites scattered throughout Mesopotamia and Egypt also freely intermarried so that it is probable that large numbers of Middle-easterner are Jews (have Jewish blood in their bloodline) including many Arabs.



Who then are Jews today? Whoever decides to call himself a Jew (this was the basis on which Israel was formed).

But who are the true Israel? Answer: those millions of Jews who believed in the Messiah who CONTINUED to be the Israel accepted by God. The remainder were rejected by God, never to be restored unless as individuals they come to believe in the Messiah.

That Israel accepted by God was augmented by Gentile proselytes who became Messiah believers and thus Israelite proselytes. They TOO CONTINUED as the true Israel. There was no question of replacement. They always have been Israel. It is unbelieving Jews who are no longer Israel. That is the message of Rom 9-11.



Total nonsense. Unbelieving Jews are NOT in the body of Christ. They can only become so by believing in the Messiah and being incorporated back in to the true Israel which is made up of all true believers in Christ



First part of the reply is to as who the Jews are.

The name/term Jew comes from the split of the kingdom of Israel.
The Southern Kingdom is known as Judah, which is where Jew came from.
So when I say Jew I am referencing thos with the lineiage to the Kingdom of Judah, which can be traced very easily.
I know this because my dad, explained to me that his lineiage comes from the Russian Jews that came to America when they were being kicked out of Russia. On top of that my dad did DNA testing to look at his ancestry, and our ancestry trace back to to the region of the area in the Middle East that the Southern Kingdom was in.

No the northern kingdom, referred to either as Israel or Ephraim, is the part that was atually scattered amongst the nations, and is extremely hard to trace back.

It looks as you are referring to the whole of Israel as Jews, which only a part of the whole of Israel is concidered the Jews.

When reading the prophets, one needs to pay very close attention to what is being said. The language it uses a lot is the terms Israel, Ephraim, and Judah it's all referrencing which part of the whole of Israel is. Again when the prophets reference Israel vs. Judah or Ephraim vs. Judah, it's basically referrencing Northern Kingdom vs. Southern Kingdom.

So simply as far as who the Jews are, it's just someone who is a decendant from the Kingdom of Judah.


Now part 2.
You may correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption.
My assumption is that you are stating that basically stating is that God ultimately gave up on the whole of Israel, so God Himself changed to conform to the gentiles because the northern kingdom was scattered amongst the nations (despite the northern kingdom being the main cause of the split and turning away from God's ways). So God conforms to the northern kingdom, and leaves the southern kingdom completely doomed and punished even though they kept God's ways. Thus ultimately replacing Israel with a "new system".

The makes no sense and is not biblical.

See the reason why the northern kingdom was scattered is because they had poor leadership and went away from God's ways. The southern kingdom had poor leadership and perversed God's was by adding to His ways, thus still making it not God's ways.

When God came into covenant with Israel it was a love language similar to marriage, and it was basically a marrying of God and Israel together.
Israel as a whole became an adulterer by doing their own things whether it be steering away from God's covenant, or adding their own traditions into His covenant.
Ultimately according to God's covenant there has to be a sacrifice for sin when there is adultry (it wasn't always immediately stoning).
Jesus paid that price of the adultery of Israel because God loves Israel and He wants His people in His covenant.
Jesus was that ultimate sin offering/sacrifice to cover the adultry of Israel.
Now along with that since the northern kingdom was disperssed amongst the nations (gentiles), Jesus' death broke the wall/barrier that kept gentiles out of the convenant between God and Israel. This why it's said there is no Greek/gentile or jew in Christ. Because Jesus broke that barrier and took it away.

There are faults on both sides as far as northern/southern kingdoms and what they did so there was that sacrifice needed for the 2 to come back together as one.

Now I do agree with you, that the Jews need to come and accept Christ, but that does not make them non-included or replaced as far as what/who Israel is to God.
Anyone who is a believer is a child of Israel, because that's what God calls His people.
 
G

Gr8grace

Guest
LOL what a good example of Bible reductionism BY YOU. The exact numbers from each tribe named were given. Dan is excluded. There is no honest way in which you can make them include Dan. If you are right God has excised Dan from Irsael.

James 1.1 called the church 'the twelve tribes of Israel (had his letter been aimed at Jews he would necessarily have informed them how to behave towards Gentile Christians). Jesus said that His disciples would rule over 'the twelve tribes of Israel', namely the church. The use of 12 x 12 and of 144,000 as numbers for the New Jerusalem (the bride of Christ) confirm what John was saying here in Rev 7. As Paul said in the church there is neither Jew nor Greek. And the church is undoubtedly in mind in Rev 7 which in fact is describing the situation from 1st century AD onwards. It is only your fanciful interpretations that avoid that. So the 144000 undoubtedly include the whole church as numbered and sealed by God.




So the New Jerusalem is the whole church including Old and New Testament saints.



yes between the Old and New Testaments. Pre-Christ Israel (OT believers) and post-Christ Israel (NT believers)



As Eph 1.13; 4.30 make clear the sealed of God are the church of Christ. As seen above (e.g. James 1.1) 'the twelve tribes' means the church to NT believers.

If it is literal it is in error. It does NOT include every tribe of the sons of Israel. Rather it is parabolic.

.

where oh where is Dan. ? The list does not include every tribe.




Yes this is explaining who the 144,000 represent, the whole church of Jesus Christ which will be gathered out of all Christians through the centuries.


yes the believers among the twelve pre-Christian tribes of Israel and the believers among the church founded on the Apostles. The gates allowed in the Old Testament believers from the twelve tribes, the foundation was the Apostles who represented the church of the Messiah. The wall of the New Jerusalem (the bride of Christ) is 144,000. A clear interpretation of Rev 7
Dan actually answers the question that this does not refer to the Church but Israel. Dan is reserved to Judge Israel. Israel's judge comes from Dans tribe.

Gen 49~~16“Dan shall judge his people, As one of the tribes of Israel. 17“Dan shall be a serpent in the way,
A horned snake in the path,
That bites the horse’s heels,
So that his rider falls backward.