Replacement theology? Yes or No.
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
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.
. 
I think that 'credited' should be considered with regards to Abraham in Romans 4. It would have been easy to say it another way. I believe that it is the imputation that is credited. In other words, we should not substitute the word 'credit' with 'imputed' as many do, rather, it's better to think of it as 'credited' as in it's going to happen, and Abraham will receive it, by promise, from God Himself, but it needs to happen first. When it does, Abraham is assured by promise that he will receive this imputation. After all, why have a promise if they already have it (Hebrews 8:6-7)?
But Abraham died having not received it Hebrews 12:39-40. Hebrews 11:14.
It was still future (Ezekiel 36:26-27, John 7L38-39)
The redemption of the National Israel is inevitable. Jerusalem will be the city of the King.
You didn't get the memo? Pity.
[Mat 5:35 KJV] 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
So God is a liar?
Jeremiah 33: 23- 26
Moreover, the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah: “Have you not noticed what these people are saying: ‘The LORD has rejected the two families He had chosen’? So they despise My people and no longer regard them as a nation. This is what the LORD says: If I have not established My covenant with the day and the night and the fixed order of heaven and earth, then I would also reject the descendants of Jacob and of My servant David, so as not to take from his descendants rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For I will restore them from captivity and will have compassion on them.”
The sun still rises, the moon and stars still shine at night. God's covenant with Israel has no expired. The church is grafted in to Israel. You do not kill the tree. The graft would perish with it.
The sun still rises, the moon and stars still shine at night. God's covenant with Israel has no expired. The church is grafted in to Israel. You do not kill the tree. The graft would perish with it.
No, God certainly is not the liar.
Guess that makes the replacement theology crowd the guilty party right?
They do not deliberately lie, they are deceived.
1) No, but rather the earthly nation shall be restored because Jesus is the guarantor of the Abrahamic covenant that is unilateral and PRECEDES the Sinaiatic covenant.
2) The real reason people are looking to earthly Israel is because they definitely believe Jesus.
It's a mixed bag. At any rate, bummer to be in their shoes!
The question is: Did God restore them from their captivity after those words were given?
He did, and that was from Babylon, so God did not lie.
That does not make us free to reuse those words into a context that they were never intended.
The church is grafted into FAITHFUL Israel, and faithful Israel is also a heavenly nation.
The Abrahamic covenant was not made with any unfaithful person,
and the earthly nation owed it's existence to the Mosaic covenant.
Earthly Israel under the Mosaic covenant is definitely dead, but the "Tree" is still living, because it is not an earthly nation.
Galatians 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.:
Jesus told his disciples he will be crucified, many times.
So to help God, Judah sold Jesus.
The other 11 should all be like Judah?
Supporting a secular system is the same analogy, according to that memo.
Celebrating Judah, as well as all the leaders, crowd that put Jesus on cross, according to that memo.
Twist the scriptures all you like. The sun rose this morning. God's covenant with Israel stands. The day will come when there is a new heavens and a new earth and God's covenant with Israel will expire. Until then, you'll have to argue with God because I believe His word. Literal, physical Israel is a sign to the lost world that God keeps His promises and can do the impossible. Lord Jesus will descend on the Mount of Olives and rule and reign from Jerusalem. 144,000 Jews will evangelise the world that the church failed to reach. Your unbelief will not change that. You should get over your bitterness and resentment. It's not becoming to a believer.
For the record you have never come across as bitter and/or resentful.
Reminds me of the truth in this saying, "when pointing a finger at someone else, three fingers are pointing back to the person making the accusation."
The relevant question is as follows: Will Christ Jesus receive them who rejected Him at His first coming?
The answer is a resounding unequivocal YES. And they too shall, by an act of their own free will, enter into the New Covenant.
Psa 118:26
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD!
We have blessed you from the house of the LORD.
Luk 13:35
“See! Your house is left to you desolate; and assuredly,[fn] I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!' ”[fn]
Mat 23:39
“for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!' ”[fn]
So much for Hosea 1:10 and 2:23, those people who were called "not my people" becoming "sons of the living God".
That argument is yet more replacement-theology snake oil, because it ignores the most elementary fact in Hosea: the people called “not my people” are the same Israelites whom God later promises to restore.
Hosea is not speaking about the Church replacing Israel. He is speaking about Israel being disciplined and then restored.
The sequence is explicit:
Who are the people in the passage? Hosea answers the question himself: “the children of Israel.” The prophecy does not say that Israel will disappear and that an unrelated Gentile body will inherit Israel’s identity. It says that the same people placed under covenant discipline will later be restored to covenant favour.
Hosea 2:23 is equally explicit:
The antecedent is Israel. God first withdraws the outward enjoyment of covenant blessing because of Israel’s unfaithfulness and then promises to reverse that judgment. “Not my people” is a judicial status imposed upon Israel; “my people” is Israel’s future restoration.
To turn that passage into “Israel ceased to exist and the Church took its place” requires the interpreter to commit wholesale violence against the context. Israel must stop meaning Israel. Her judgment must stop being Israel’s judgment. Her restoration must stop being Israel’s restoration. The land, national reunion and covenant renewal must all be dissolved into an allegory never stated by Hosea.
Paul’s quotation of Hosea in Romans 9 does not alter Hosea’s original meaning. Paul applies the principle displayed in Hosea: God sovereignly calls into mercy those who stood outside the enjoyment of covenant privilege. That principle can properly be applied to the calling of Gentiles. But an application of Hosea’s language to Gentile salvation does not cancel Hosea’s literal promise to Israel.
Paul immediately proves this by distinguishing ***the two groups***:
He does not say, “The Gentiles are now Israel.” He says that God has called people from both Jews and Gentiles. He then quotes Isaiah regarding the remnant of Israel. The ethnic distinction remains intact throughout the argument.
Romans 9 must also be read through Romans 11, where Paul asks whether God has rejected His people and answers:
He warns Gentile believers not to boast against Israel’s natural branches. He states that Israel’s blindness is partial and temporary. He then declares that Israel will yet be saved in accordance with covenant promise.
That is the very opposite of replacement theology.
The fraud in the replacement argument is the assumption that whenever an Old Testament passage is applied to Gentiles, its original promise to Israel has been confiscated. But application is not cancellation, and shared mercy is not transferred identity.
Hosea teaches:
- Israel was placed under covenant discipline.
- Israel was temporarily treated as “not my people.”
- Israel will again be acknowledged as God’s people.
- Israel and Judah will ultimately be reunited and restored.
- God is free to extend mercy to Gentiles.
- Jewish and Gentile believers are both called through faith.
- Israel remains a distinct people with an irrevocable future.
The replacement-theology reading is not derived from Hosea. It is imposed upon Hosea by people who cannot tolerate the plain promise that the nation placed under judgment is the same nation God will ultimately restore.
“Not my people” describes Israel under discipline.
“My people” describes Israel restored.
Gentile inclusion does not require Jewish dispossession.
Participation in blessing is not transfer of identity
Yes, Gentile believers are blessed with faithful Abraham. Yes, those who belong to Christ are Abraham’s spiritual seed and heirs according to promise. But Abraham had more than one category of promise. The fact that Gentiles share in the spiritual blessing of justification by faith does not make them ethnic Israel, transfer Israel’s land title to them, or turn Jerusalem into the Church.Galatians 3 expressly identifies the blessing reaching the Gentiles as receiving justification and the promised Spirit through faith. It does not say:
That sentence exists only in the replacement theologian’s imagination.
The same failure infects the rest of the list:
- Deuteronomy 32 predicts God provoking Israel through Gentile blessing. That presupposes the continuing distinction between Israel and the Gentiles provoking Israel.
- Isaiah 54 may be applied typologically or spiritually in Galatians 4 without cancelling Isaiah’s national promises to restored Israel.
- Israel’s priestly vocabulary may be applied to believers without turning the Church into geopolitical Israel.
- Temple imagery may describe the Church without making the Church the literal city of Jerusalem.
- Paul may describe his ministry in priestly terms without becoming a Levitical priest.
- The Church may enjoy the spiritual reality of God dwelling among His people without exhausting Jeremiah 31’s explicitly named covenant with “the house of Israel” and “the house of Judah.”
Daniel 9 does not leave its audience open for theological reassignment. Gabriel says:
Daniel’s prayer has already identified both.
He confesses the sins of Israel, Judah, the inhabitants of Jerusalem and “all Israel.” He pleads concerning Jerusalem, God’s holy mountain and the desolate sanctuary. Gabriel then answers that prayer by speaking of Daniel’s people and Daniel’s holy city. The natural referents are therefore Israel and Jerusalem—not a previously unrevealed multinational body called the Church. Daniel 9:24–27 itself continues to concern Jerusalem, its rebuilding, Messiah’s presentation, the destruction of the city and sanctuary, and the final covenant crisis.
To make Daniel’s people the Church, you must perform four acts of exegetical vandalism:
- Sever Gabriel’s answer from Daniel’s prayer.
- Redefine Daniel’s people as a body Daniel never mentioned.
- Redefine Daniel’s holy city as something other than Jerusalem.
- Import later Church revelation into a prophecy explicitly framed around Israel’s city and sanctuary.
Daniel 9 provides evidence for an interval because two events occur after the sixty-ninth week but before the final week described in verse 27:
- Messiah is cut off.
- Jerusalem and the sanctuary are destroyed.
The Church Age is therefore not the subject of Daniel 9:24. It occupies the unrevealed interval during which Israel’s seventy-week clock is not advancing.
That distinction is elementary:
- Daniel directly prophesies Israel’s seventy-week program.
- Daniel reveals an interval between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks.
- The New Testament later reveals the Church mystery occupying that interval.
- Daniel does not thereby become a prophecy “about the Church Age.”
Every passage cited proves, at most, that the Church receives genuine spiritual blessings through Israel’s Messiah and may be described using language drawn from Israel’s Scriptures.
None proves that:
- the Church is national Israel;
- Daniel’s “thy people” means the Church;
- Daniel’s “holy city” means the Church;
- Israel’s seventieth week is being fulfilled throughout the Church Age;
- Israel’s national promises have been transferred or cancelled.
It does not.
Gentiles are Abrahamically blessed without becoming national Israel.
The Church is a spiritual temple without becoming Jerusalem.
Believers are a royal priesthood without becoming Levites.
The Church occupies Daniel’s interval without becoming the subject of Daniel’s seventy weeks.
Daniel 9 remains exactly where Gabriel placed it: upon Daniel’s people—Israel—and Daniel’s holy city—Jerusalem.
This appears to be a different "gospel".
John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Please at least try and remain rationally attached to the flow of logic presented will you?
At this point it is no surprise to me that you have no idea whatsoever that those passages exist, and certainly no grasp of their intended meaning.
Here are more of the same meant to put you on tilt.
Jesus CLEARLY states that a ***future*** Elijah will come and RESTORE all things, INCLUDING the "kingdom to Israel".
Yes, the crucifixion did NOT result in the salvation of the Nation Israel back then.
However, it DID set in motion these "UNTIL" statements. All of which make certain a FUTURE prophetic salvation of the whole nation.
Explain if you can these crucial UNTIL statements and these equally critical RESTORE statements.
Act 1:6
When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the ***kingdom to Israel***?
Act 1:11
Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Mat 17:11
And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Act 3:21
“whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.
Luk 13:35
Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Luk 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Rom 11:25
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.
Already fulfilled. Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
You believe all of Matthew 24 has been fulfilled?