SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : "replacement theology"

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Sidenote: What does "the dividing wall of hostility" Eph. 1:14 mean - theologically, and in its outworking?


It is a reference, by means of an illustration, of the barriers between Jew and Gentile which are broken down in the gospel.

The Temple had a [url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/20/Temple_inscription_in_greek.jpg/250px-Temple_inscription_in_greek.jpg]barrier[/url] which excluded Gentiles from the Holy Place. This picture shows a piece of masonry from Herods temple with words banning Gentiles from passing this barrier 'on pain of death'. It separated Jew from Gentile.

The word 'partition' in “For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;”
(Ephesians 2:14 KJVS) is the Greek word for a 'hedge' and is the word used in...“Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:”
(Matthew 21:33 KJVS)God had 'hedged' in his 'peculiar' people and expected fruit from them. The hedge was broken down in the cross so that there is no longer separation into Jew and Gentile. Theologically, the dividing wall was the Law.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2007/5/11 11:32Profile









 Re:

Quote:
God had 'hedged' in his 'peculiar' people and expected fruit from them. The hedge was broken down in the cross so that there is no longer separation into Jew and Gentile. Theologically, the dividing wall was the Law.

Wowzers, those were beautiful words that you put together there Phil.

To rebuild that hedge means that what Christ accomplished on the cross by taking the two (Jew and Gentile) and making one new man (In Himself) so making peace would have to be destroyed if God is to plant a vineyard, hedge it in, dig a winepress, build a Temple in the state of Israel.

Well, thats blasphemy!!

God is not the author of confusion. He said thru Paul, that there is no difference between the Jew and the Gentile. Did God speak thru any of the prophets saying that there is going to be a distinction in 2000 years between the Jew and the Gentile?

I believe I read someplace that God made a NEW Covenant. New contracts always have new rights and stipulations, it included all nations, not just one in particular. Sounds like the covenant that God made with Abraham, that all the nations of the earth would be blessed.

 2007/5/11 12:28
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

One of the dangerous of Christian Zionism is that a good number of Christians come away with a false belief that Jews can be saved through Judaism because they are 'God's chosen people'.

Opponents like to use the phrase 'Replacement Theology', but in truth it is 'Fulfillment Theology'. The OT points to Christ. He is the fulfillment. All those who are in Christ (those and those alone) are God's chosen people.

 2007/5/11 16:15Profile









 Re: "replacement theology"

Jay said

Quote:
Opponents...

Um.... could you please give a little more definition to 'opponents'? Thanks.


Also, your use of the very old phrase 'God's chosen people' sent me scurrying for the Bible references to it. Very very interesting.... because it doesn't actually appear in that form.

God chose [u]individual people[/u] again and again, and when He spoke in Exodus 19 (quoted accurately in 1 Peter 2), it is completely conditional on [i]all[/i] the people obeying His commandments.

Then, looking at 'have chosen', it is clear God chose Judah for the sake of David, and, at the pleasure of His own good will, He chose Jerusalem to put [u]His name[/u] there.

At no time did He overlook sins of any or every kind.

 2007/5/13 11:54
ADisciple
Member



Joined: 2007/2/3
Posts: 835
Alberta, Canada

 Re: Replacement Theology

There have been some very wise and insightful and helpful remarks on this thread, and I will just add a bit.

If replacement theology means that God has replaced Israel with the Church, that doesn't get it right.

"God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew" (Rom. 11.2).

And in fact the first church was composed of people who were Jews after the flesh (Acts 2.5).

But what God did do was-- and I like the "transposing" idea-- He transposed the Olive Tree of Israel into a higher octive. From the Old Covenant into the New Covenant. It's still the same Olive Tree, but called now The Church (sorry to mix the metaphors). The New Covenant is for the Jew first, and also for the Gentile.

And in this transposing process, God broke off the unbelieving branches from the Olive Tree, and grafted in the wild believing branches, so that now the Olive Tree is composed of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. There is "no difference" between them now in this New Creation Man. (And the words "no difference" are used three or four times in the New Testament relative to Jew and Gentile. That's a strong emphasis. This has already been pointed out in an earlier posting on this thread.)

And then, in due time, Paul tells us, God will graft in again a great multitude of these "natural branches." "And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again" (Rom. 11.23). And this, he says, when it happens, shall be so wondrous a thing that he calls it "life from the dead" (Rom. 11.15). An even higher "octave" that all the branches both Jew and Gentile shall enjoy together in God's time!

...I am at times perplexed why Jewish people (and even many Christians now) cleave so tenaciously to the false hope that God still has something for natural Israel on Old Covenant terms. Why? This is so short-sighted. Why would they sell themselves short of the awesome promises of the New Covenant? (Can it be they simply are not seeing the unsearchable riches of the New Covenant, and the New Creation?)

But it does seem they have a very difficult time surrendering their earthly identity. Even though Paul (himself a Jew) counted it all DUNG that he might win Christ.

Yet these days even Jews who turn to Christ still want to be called "Messianic Jews." Am I then, a "Messianic Gentile"? No, I am just a plain ordinary "Christian." Oh, is that all? What a let-down.

...I share these things almost reluctantly. I know this whole subject can become a very emotionally charged issue, and can cause such misunderstandings, and bitterness. It needs to be handled with sensitivity and gentleness and grace. To say the things I have said above... at one time I was accused of being anti-Semitic for saying such things. Exactly the opposite is the truth. It's LOVE for those people, the love of Christ, that compels us to say them. God has nothing LESS for them than He has for us, and you feel JEALOUS for them that they don't get misled by the short-sighted teachers who would turn them aside from their heritage in Christ!

AD




_________________
Allan Halton

 2007/5/13 14:12Profile









 Re: "replacement theology"


AD,

Your reference to previous posts made me to turn back the pages. Thank you for your very gentle exposition.

I'm now referring (without quoting the whole paragraph from p7), to something philologos said, as a springboard to an alternative thought.

Quote:
I think it refers to Abraham rather than to a race...

I certainly agree it is not 'a race'. And I see what you are saying about the centrality of 'faith' like Abraham's. But, is this not also 'faith like' Christ's?

For the purpose of understanding the olive tree, I see the legal status of 'the Branch' (Zech 6) as we have been discussing in 'Jacob or Heli', as being in the same picture as 'planted in death' (or grafted into death) - as the corn of wheat - enabling Him who was 'cut off' ('but not for Himself' Dan 9), to become that 'tree' from whence 'the root' now grows.

That's the [i]thumbnail[/i] which makes sense to my understanding.

 2007/5/13 15:07
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Dorcas, by saying 'opponents' I was referring to anyone who believes that Israel is separate and distinct from the Church and that God has a separate plan for them.

I wrote:

Quote:
All those who are in Christ (those and those alone) are God's chosen people.



You replied:
Quote:
God chose individual people again and again, and when He spoke in Exodus 19 (quoted accurately in 1 Peter 2), it is completely conditional on all the people obeying His commandments.



1 Peter 2:9-10 says,
"But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

God does choose individual people again and again, but the whole of the chosen are a people.

Also note that in 1 Peter 2:7-8, "So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone," and "A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense." They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do."

To those who believe will not be put to shame, but to those who do not believe they will stumble. Look at the beginning of verse 9, "But you Peter says there will be some who disbelieve and are put to shame, but you are different. You are a chosen people.

It is biblical to say that Christians are God's chosen people, created in Christ Jesus to do good works.

 2007/5/13 17:27Profile









 Re: "replacement theology"

Jay said

Quote:
by saying 'opponents' I was referring to anyone who believes that Israel is separate and distinct from the Church and that God has a separate plan for them.

Thanks. I find it astonishing that anyone reading scripture can think this. There is not even historical precedent [i]within scripture[/i] for it!


Jay quoted the apostle Peter's
Quote:
[b]Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people[/b]; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

Reading this again I am completely sure that Peter was not referring only to Jewish Christians here.

Quote:
God does choose individual people again and again, but the whole of the chosen are a people.

Yes. But when 'the Jews' refer to themselves as a chosen race, they are excluding all gentiles. That's why it was informative to look for the phrase, 'chosen people'.... because the only way to make sense of it as Peter is using it, is to include gentiles as [i]the sons of God[/i] which believers become through new birth. And the only way to make sense of it in the Old Testament is in the context of faith and obedience to God's word, which is many times characterised by the acts of individuals, rather than the whole nation (who regularly get into trouble with God). Then, all God's historically chosen individuals [i]and [/i] those born again, are included in Hebrews 11:40 - [i]God having provided something better for us, that [u]they[/u] should [u]not[/u] be made perfect [u]apart from us[/u][/i].



I had another thought today about the thumbnail in my previous post, which is that 'the root' is one picture which corresponds to Jesus Christ being the chief corner of the [i]foundation[/i] of the Church.

 2007/5/14 15:32









 Re:

When I hear "Replacement Theology", it seems many people think the Church replaced the promises to Israel. According to Romans 11, after the fulness of the gentiles have come in, then Israel will be saved. Acts 1:6&7 , Peter asked Jesus about when the Kingdom will be restored to Israel...Jesus didn't say it wouldn't or that it has been replaced with the Church, Jesus said it is not for us to know the time of that event. It seems as though the ones who believe in this kind of Replacement Theology are anti-semitic. Replacement/Reconstruction/Dominion Theology all go together, and many false gospels have sprung from these beliefs, believing we are going to be restored back to what Adam & Eve were before the fall. Even if Adam & Eve never sinned, they were never considered co-heirs, or promised to be Glorified together with Jesus Christ. The first man adam was a living soul and made from the dust/earth...earthly. The second man Adam, is a life giving spirit and Jesus Christ is heavenly.

We will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is. Bone of His Bone and Flesh of His flesh. A NEW Creation as never before. :-)

 2007/5/14 16:37
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Quote:
Reading this again I am completely sure that Peter was not referring only to Jewish Christians here.



I agree, he is referring to all who have faith in Jesus--whether Jew or Gentile.

 2007/5/14 16:54Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy