"replacement theology" - what is it?

[valiant]

In conclusion...


God does not make this
promise to the Church.




"I WILL MAKE YOU A GREAT NATION; I will bless you and make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU, AND I WILL CURSE HIM WHO CURSES YOU; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Genesis 12:2-3 - Emphasis Added)

But He DOES. Read Gal 3.28-29. We have all been joined to Israel (Rom 11.12-24). Read Ephesians 2.11-22 without blinkers on,

God pronounces a curse on all those who curse (despises or takes action against) His covenant people of Israel

Jesus for one?

. Why is this important? A majority in the world-wide Christian Church are now involved in “cursing Israel" through the false tenants of Replacement Theology, which they are convinced is true Christianity.

Why should we curse Israel, we have been made one with the believing remnant of Israel.

And now, for the first time in her history, America is committing the same sin. The last American presidential administration and the current one (spanning 16 years) goes to great lengths to "publically appear" to support the Jewish state. Yet, behind the scenes, outright resistance and even hostility is the norm. Anyone who claims to believe the Bible should heed this divine warning.

Jesus rejected the nation of Israel and replaced it by a new nation (Maat 21.43)

Replacement theology (also known as Supersessionism) arrogantly disregards and attempts to rewrite Bible Prophecy.

we don't accept replacement theology. we accept Biblical theology that we have all been made a part of the true Israel. The middle wall of partition has been done away. we are fellow citizens with the saints (Eph 2.11-22).

Various theologians and other adherents within the church attempt to change the wording of the Bible by insisting that when you see the words “Israel or Jew" in Scripture - that God is actually referring to the Church.

Right on. The old testament believing Jews (and before them, Israel) were the ekklesia. We have been united with them, not as jews but as Israel,,

This godless practice redefines terms and claims that The Church is now “the new Israel”. When you hear Christ’s Church referred to as "the new Israel", it’s a warning that you’re in contact with this erroneous theology.

God's new nation? Matt 21.43 The true vine John 15.1-6. Shame on Jesus.

The demonic practice of redefining Scripture is accomplished by distorting or ignoring the context of the Bible.

No you are the ones who ignore what Jesus accomplished.

Simply understood, Supersessionism teaches that because the Jewish people rejected and crucified Jesus Christ, God has permanently rejected Israel and "replaced" her with the New Testament Church in His overall Biblical plan for the world.

God did reject the Jewish people. He destroyed Jerusalem. He accepted the remnant who believed on the Messiah as the true Israel and with them the Gentile proselytes who joined with them as part of the true Israel.

As a result, Supersessionists believe that the original covenants between Israel and God are now transferred to and binding upon the Church; "the new Israel".

Not in my book. We partake in the new covenant. The original sinaitic covenant is replaced (Jeremiah 31; Matt 26; Hebrews 8).

 

[kaylagrl]

But He DOES. Read Gal 3.28-29. We have all been joined to Israel (Rom 11.12-24). Read Ephesians 2.11-22 without blinkers on,


[/COLOR][/B] [/B]


Jesus for one?



Why should we curse Israel, we have been made one with the believing remnant of Israel.



Jesus rejected the nation of Israel and replaced it by a new nation (Maat 21.43)



we don't accept replacement theology. we accept Biblical theology that we have all been made a part of the true Israel. The middle wall of partition has been done away. we are fellow citizens with the saints (Eph 2.11-22).




Right on. The old testament believing Jews (and before them, Israel) were the ekklesia. We have been united with them, not as jews but as Israel,,





God's new nation? Matt 21.43 The true vine John 15.1-6. Shame on Jesus.



No you are the ones who ignore what Jesus accomplished.



God did reject the Jewish people. He destroyed Jerusalem. He accepted the remnant who believed on the Messiah as the true Israel and with them the Gentile proselytes who joined with them as part of the true Israel.



Not in my book. We partake in the new covenant. The original sinaitic covenant is replaced (Jeremiah 31; Matt 26; Hebrews 8).

I get it, you're just restating the whole replacement theology. I know the doctrine.

 

[KJV1611]

Originally Posted by KJV1611
Please explain you understanding of this verse.

Romans 9:8 KJV

That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Read chapers 9 though 11. Paul makes it clear that a remnant will be saved and that God is not done with the Jews.

Chapters 9 through 11 don't contradict Romans 9:8 at all. If you think they do, please show me which specific verses contradict "The children of the flesh are not the children of God".

I agree that a remnant of Jews will be saved but a whole lot of them wont be saved. But that has nothing to do with the Jews being God's chosen people. ONLY the children of the promise are chosen, both Jew and Gentile. Ancestry has nothing to do with being a child of God. The fleshly children are not God's chosen people.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

"I WILL MAKE YOU A GREAT NATION; I will bless you and make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I WILL BLESS THOSE WHO BLESS YOU, AND I WILL CURSE HIM WHO CURSES YOU; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Genesis 12:2-3 - Emphasis Added)

So who is the promise to Kayla?

you do realise there are different people spoken of there right? not everyone was included in "the nation" yet all nations are included in the blessing

 

[KJV1611]

funny in a thinking kind of way

that is indeed open to interpretation

there is also the story in the NT...a story of forgiveness and the grace and unmerited love and favor of the younger son's father....could swing that one for Israel IMO

regarding Christ...you take liberties, but this one is really off the charts

Jesus is God's SECOND born son FIGURATIVELY? with Israel the first? ...of course that is your figurative conclusion...thankfully we are not under your care or teaching and are not new born babes in the word...although I am pretty certain you would also conclude...that FIGURATIVELY we are if we do not have the same view of the majesty, splendor and perfection of the KJ that you do...yes a tad sarcastic but your post is so far out in left field that they are still clearing the woods to make room for that pitch


29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. Romans 8


15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.
17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.
19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. Colossians 1

seems pretty clear that the firstborn, Jesus is firstborn over ALL creation which would include Israel

the so called 'proof' you present, is actually only you're preterist viewpoint that must, of necessity, skew Scripture
to bend it to your will

Maybe this will help.

I'm talking about firstborn SONS, not first born of creation, not first born among brothers and sisters, but first born sons. In Exodus God calls Israel his firstborn son. Jesus is also the son of God, if Israel is the firstborn then Jesus is God's second born. Israel represents the flesh (firstborn), Jesus represents the second birth, the miraculous birth - born again.

Exodus 4:22 KJV
And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord , Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Po

Paul is arguing that God has not done away with the elect (children of the promise) of Israel just because the kingdom was taken away from fleshly Israel. Paul is a part of the remnant of fleshly Israel that will be saved. There have been and will always be a small amount of Jews who will be saved even though the kingdom was taken from Israel, this is the remnant.

no, that was already explained in chapter 9, the "isreal in chapter 11 is physical.

Isreal is hated according to the gospel, but beloved according to election, gods gifts are irrevocable, he gae them a promise he ang gave them a gift he never gave anyone else

 

[eternally-gratefull]

stop embarrassing yourself.

hate to say it sis, and i do not wish to get into this with you because of our past. but the same could be said to you, both sides could say this

 

[KJV1611]

no, that was already explained in chapter 9, the "isreal in chapter 11 is physical.

Isreal is hated according to the gospel, but beloved according to election, gods gifts are irrevocable, he gae them a promise he ang gave them a gift he never gave anyone else

You're starting from the wrong premise. Your assumption is that fleshly Israel is God's chosen people but they are not. The children of the flesh are not the chldren of God, the children of the promise are the children of God and they are the one's who are God's elect.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You're starting from the wrong premise. Your assumption is that fleshly Israel is God's chosen people but they are not. The children of the flesh are not the chldren of God, the children of the promise are the children of God and they are the one's who are God's elect.

Your the one starting from the wrong premis, that the election of romans 11 means being saved. That is not the context of "God is not done with Isreal"

so, I recommend you study the OT, God chose isreal for a purpose. that purpose is not done away with, that is pauls point, they will all be saved and be restored to that purpose, that is why there is a remnant, the only purpose of a remnant is to assure the bloodline does not break,

There is no need of a remant in chapter 9. There is no jew or gentile
There is no need to say all isreal will be saved in chapter 9. No one would have questioned it.
There is no need to seperate blind/vs seeing Israel in chapter 9. there is no one blind in chpater 9. the saved or saved, whether they are slave or free, male or female jew or gentile.

Preterisms mistake is it makes Gods promise to isreal and their election only mean salvation (everyone elect is saved) that was NEVER gods intention, it is NOT why he elected them and it is not the context of the election in romans 11.

 

[Ahwatukee]

You're starting from the wrong premise. Your assumption is that fleshly Israel is God's chosen people but they are not. The children of the flesh are not the children of God, the children of the promise are the children of God and they are the one's who are God's elect.

The children of promise are made up of Jews and Gentiles who believe in Christ and who belong to the church. Paul is speaking about those of physical Israel as branches that have been broken off because of their lack of faith and so that God may have mercy on the Gentiles. Once the time of the Gentiles has been completed, God will then have mercy on physical Israel during that last 3 1/2 years.

"I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen."

At some point from the time that the abomination is set up and physical, unbelieving, Israel flees and is cared for by God out in the wilderness during that last 3 1/2 years, they will come to the knowledge that Jesus is in fact their Messiah by proclaiming "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord." If the scripture was speaking about spiritual Israel, which would be those who would be having the same faith as Abraham, they would not present during that last seven years, because "the Israel of promise" would have been apart of the church and will have have been caught up at the time the church is gathered and that because they, the Israel of promise, would be those who belong to the church. For within the church there is neither Jew nor Gentile, but all are in Christ.

God is going to deal with physical Israel during those last seven years in fulfillment of the seventy seven year periods that was decreed upon them.

 

[ZEEK]

Romans was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, (and of Judah).
Paul was writing to Jews at that time, the 40 year grace period, to explain to them that although they had killed Jesus and rejected him, God had not rejected them.

The door remained open to them to repent and save themselves. As Peter had said at the first Pentecost:

[FONT=&quot]“Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.”

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Why is this so hard to understand?[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

Your the one starting from the wrong premis, that the election of romans 11 means being saved. That is not the context of "God is not done with Isreal"

so, I recommend you study the OT, God chose isreal for a purpose. that purpose is not done away with, that is pauls point, they will all be saved and be restored to that purpose, that is why there is a remnant, the only purpose of a remnant is to assure the bloodline does not break,

There is no need of a remant in chapter 9. There is no jew or gentile
There is no need to say all isreal will be saved in chapter 9. No one would have questioned it.
There is no need to seperate blind/vs seeing Israel in chapter 9. there is no one blind in chpater 9. the saved or saved, whether they are slave or free, male or female jew or gentile.

Preterisms mistake is it makes Gods promise to isreal and their election only mean salvation (everyone elect is saved) that was NEVER gods intention, it is NOT why he elected them and it is not the context of the election in romans 11.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Romans was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, (and of Judah).
Paul was writing to Jews at that time, the 40 year grace period, to explain to them that although they had killed Jesus and rejected him, God had not rejected them.

The door remained open to them to repent and save themselves. As Peter had said at the first Pentecost:

“Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.”

Why is this so hard to understand?

Paul was writing to Gentiles in the church of rome

He was answering the question many asked, Did God make a mistake (9:6) In my view, the mistake everyone asked, was in picking Isreal to be his representatives (they crucified Christ, did God make a mistake)

40 year grace period? Where do you get this from.. Grace is for all people of all ages, God does not need to give people a 40 year grace period.

what is so hard to understand that the context of romans 9 and romans 11 are two different things?

 

[KJV1611]

Your the one starting from the wrong premis, that the election of romans 11 means being saved. That is not the context of "God is not done with Isreal"

so, I recommend you study the OT, God chose isreal for a purpose. that purpose is not done away with, that is pauls point, they will all be saved and be restored to that purpose, that is why there is a remnant, the only purpose of a remnant is to assure the bloodline does not break,

There is no need of a remant in chapter 9. There is no jew or gentile
There is no need to say all isreal will be saved in chapter 9. No one would have questioned it.
There is no need to seperate blind/vs seeing Israel in chapter 9. there is no one blind in chpater 9. the saved or saved, whether they are slave or free, male or female jew or gentile.

Preterisms mistake is it makes Gods promise to isreal and their election only mean salvation (everyone elect is saved) that was NEVER gods intention, it is NOT why he elected them and it is not the context of the election in romans 11.

You're making flehsly Israel be the children of the promise and Romans 9:8 says they are not. Does Romans 9:8 not mean what it says? I'm asking you because I don't understand why you believe fleshly children are the chosen ones.

Romans 9:8 KJV
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

 

[ZEEK]

Paul was writing to Gentiles in the church of rome

Absolute rubbish. The Church was originally founded by the Jews who had visited Jerusalem at Pentecost from every nation. It had both Jew and non-Jew there.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Absolute rubbish. The Church was originally founded by the Jews who had visited Jerusalem at Pentecost from every nation. It had both Jew and non-Jew there.

And you think this proves your point?

Rome was a gentile church, Yes there may have been some jews, but to say it was jewish is RUBBISH (using your own terms.

You people and your name calling attacks, do you think this will get people to turn to your way of believing?


You also did not prove what I said wrong about what chapter 9 was about.. so please.. Attack does not help you at all.

 

[ZEEK]

He was answering the question many asked, Did God make a mistake (9:6) In my view, the mistake everyone asked, was in picking Isreal to be his representatives (they crucified Christ, did God make a mistake)

Exactly, you are defending the thing you are trying to argue against.

Romans 9:6 [FONT=&quot]It is not as though the word of God had failed

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]How had God's promise to Abraham not failed?

God promised Abraham he would be a great nation. Who is the great nation? Israel. Who is Israel? The sons of promise, the real Israelites, not the Jews who had killed jesus and still refused to repent. They are not the real Israelites. This is very simple.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You're making flehsly Israel be the children of the promise and Romans 9:8 says they are not. Does Romans 9:8 not mean what it says? I'm asking you because I don't understand why you believe fleshly children are the chosen ones.

Romans 9:8 KJV
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Romans 9 context is how one is saved, Has nothing to do with romans 11 and the election.

And no, I am not making romans 9: 8 say anything, otheer that what it says, Just because you are born into physical Israel does not make you saved,

That was a popular thinking of many jews, Pauls was refuting that lie..

but that has nothign to do with the election of Romans 11

 

[KJV1611]

Romans 9 context is how one is saved, Has nothing to do with romans 11 and the election.

And no, I am not making romans 9: 8 say anything, otheer that what it says, Just because you are born into physical Israel does not make you saved,

That was a popular thinking of many jews, Pauls was refuting that lie..

but that has nothign to do with the election of Romans 11

Then who do you think God's elect are?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Exactly, you are defending the thing you are trying to argue against.

Romans 9:6 It is not as though the word of God had failed

How had God's promise to Abraham not failed?

God promised Abraham he would be a great nation. Who is the great nation? Israel. Who is Israel? The sons of promise, the real Israelites, not the Jews who had killed jesus and still refused to repent. They are not the real Israelites. This is very simple.

lol.. Yeah actually they are the people who killed Jesus They are the children of the promise (nation) Or the "blind jews" of romans 11..

That never had anything to do with anyone being saved, they were two different promises.

Thats why paul said in rom 9 that being a child did not make you saved,,

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Then who do you think God's elect are?

elect what?

For salvation (all who come to god in faith, whether jew gentile male female free or slave)

or for national purposes..(and to you I give this land as a gift forever)