True Replacement Theology

[EdwardGoodie]

True Replacement Theology is one in which Jesus Christ is replaced with a carnal kingdom (John18:36, Luke 17:20-21, Hebrews 12:18) in the Old Covenant format, in the Middle East, instead of IN JESUS CHRIST, the new covenant (John 4:21-24).

[Seriousseeker]

An interesting way to say it.

[OurGodIsOne]

I agree, that is interesting.

[EdwardGoodie]

For individuals who hold to a paradigm of a revitalization of the Middle East people (viewed as Jews) some time in our future flies in the face of NT Scripture.

Hundreds of OT Scripture verses are used to show fulfillment (not replacement) of the promises made to Israel.  The fulfillment comes through Jesus Christ and His new covenant.  Jesus Christ was sent to the house of Israel...

Thousands upon thousands of Jews were saved in the 40-year period during the apostles ministry.  These constituted the 144,000 (12 X 12 X 1,000) from Revelation.

How one can totally negate the hundreds of OT Scriptures being applied to the church (saved Israel) is utterly beyond me...this is where dual fulfillment comes from, I guess.  Strange though that the apostles only illuminated the OT prophecies as concerning the church.

It reminds me of how one fellow on a different forum ADAMANTLY believes Zechariah 12:10 is a yet future prophecy at Christ's alleged future coming (to match dispensational tenets).

I keep telling him that it was fulfilled at Calvary:

John 19:33-37 - But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:  
34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.  
35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.  
36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.  
37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.  

In this particular passage, two Scriptures were mentioned as being fulfilled at Calvary:

Psalms 34:20 - He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.  

and

Zechariah 12:10 - And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.  

I asked this fella if he thought it was more appropriate that Christ be mourned for what He had endured at Calvary or if He should be mourned at His second coming, knowing that His coming was "a glorious appearing" (Titus 2:13) and so very contrary to Luke 9:26.

[DaveW]

Actually the mourning by the Jews will be that they went astray and rejected HIM for these past 2 millenia. (when they realized they killed off their own Messiah and systematicly led people AWAY from Him and His Salvation)

[DaveW]

Now you know that IF replacement theology was correct, that the gentile church replaced the Jews, then God is a liar.

It might also follow (since the church has not had that great a record either) that maybe mohammed was correct in saying that Islam replaced christianity.

[EdwardGoodie]

Actually the mourning by the Jews will be that they went astray and rejected HIM for these past 2 millenia. (when they realized they killed off their own Messiah and systematicly led people AWAY from Him and His Salvation)

Dave, that would be more akin to the Jews mourning themselves and the nasty deeds that were done by them rather than how the prophet Zechariah plainly states in 12:10:

Zechariah 12:10 - And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.   

It's a moot point anyway.  The prophecy is clearly fulfilled at Calvary, just as John says...but not every person believes Scripture when it is contrary to what they have been taught in their paradigm.

[EdwardGoodie]

Now you know that IF replacement theology was correct, that the gentile church replaced the Jews, then God is a liar.

It might also follow (since the church has not had that great a record either) that maybe mohammed was correct in saying that Islam replaced christianity.

Why do you say Gentile church as if that was some non-Hebrew designation?  The apostles went from synagogue to synagogue to establish the church...a simple word search on "synagogue" makes this abundantly clear.

I'll just ignore your Islam statement for the foolishness it is...

Please explain why the apostles illuminated hundreds of OT prophecies as applying to the new covenant church.  That's all.

[thethinker]

Now you know that IF replacement theology was correct, that the gentile church replaced the Jews, then God is a liar.

It might also follow (since the church has not had that great a record either) that maybe mohammed was correct in saying that Islam replaced christianity.

There was no such thing as a "Gentile" church. It was a JEWISH church with Gentiles incorporated into it. The Gentiles received the JEWISH Messiah.

That it was still a JEWISH church is proven by the fact that the Bride, the Lamb's Wife has ONLY the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written upon her (Rev. 21:12). Though Gentiles came into her the fact that their names were NOT written upon her but only the names of the twelve tribes of Israel PROVES that the church REMAINED JEWISH.

Your distinction between Israel and the Church is blatantly false!

thinker

[Seriousseeker]

Edward, I think it is important that the Church be understood as not Jewish or Gentile, but as a "new testament" about the "Bride of Christ".  Both Jews and Gentiles need to come on the same ground today to be saved ---the Jews realizing their religion was put away (actually fulfilled) in Christ;  and then the Gentiles brought in by grace to the God of all creation.

Some Christians confuse the NT with a "new" covenant, but since the Covenant with Abraham and Israel was broken by the Israelites, and God scattered them and gave them their Messiah --Jesus, the Christ, they rejected Him.  They are left today without a sacrifice and Savior if they do not come to Christ.

God promised a New Covenant in the Millennium for Israel (Heb. 8:7-10).  The Lord Jesus will establish Israel again as a nation with blessings as an earthly people (the New Covenant), and they will then acknowledge Him (Zech. 13:6).  We need to see the Church as the Bride and a heavenly people, and Israel today as yet scattered and in need of the same salvation.  The Israelites in the Millennium will be the 144,000 preserved for the Kingdom, not the ones today.

[DaveW]

Why do I say "gentile church?" because that is what it is.  At the 325 ad Council of Nicea (first one) any Jewish practice such as honoring the Sabbath and abstaining certain foods was outlawed.  The Nicean creed was formulated with wording that seems (to Jewish ears) like it was intended to keep Jews away, even the ones who DID believe in Jesus.

How is that a Jewish church?

Yes Paul (aka Rav Sha'ul) did start in the synagogues in the cities he went to. But they kicked him out. The congregations he started had some Jews, some God-fearers and the rest were gentiles who were unfamiliar with Judaism or what we call the "old testament." Paul (rightly so) insisted that they NOT follow Judaism, not because Judaism was WRONG per se, but it was wrong FOR THEM. (as gentiles) As we can see in Acts 21, the Jewish believers who came into the faith by the other apostles kept to Judaic practice including Temple worship.  they were "zealous for the Law." And by his actions in that chapter, Paul testified that he agreed with that arrangement.

By the end of the first century there were several Messianic Synagogues (Jewish churches) established all over the east end of the Mediteranean.

After Nicea, where Messianic Judaism was called a false religion by Eusubius, it died a slow death over the next century. By the mid 400s it was gone.

What was left was the Gentile Church.  But fortunately, in the mid-late 1800s, a few rabbis in Europe came to faith.  Orthodox Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein in Rumania and Chassidic Rabbi Joseph Rabinowitz in Russia came to faith in Jesus and started Messianic Synagogues. That started the Modern Messinaic Movement. Again for the first time in over 1400 years we have the dual thrust of Jew and Gentile working together.

[EdwardGoodie]

The millennium you folks attempt to represent is skewed.  You believe Zechariah 12:10 is a yet future millennial prophecy.  Yet, it is clearly fulfilled in John 19 (as stated),

You believe Isaiah 11 is also representative of a millennial period.  Yet, Paul, in Romans 15:12 refers to Isaiah 11:10 in reference to the Gentiles being saved in his time frame...

It is the same "in that day" of Isaiah 10:20, 10:27, and 11:11...

Isaiah 10:20:

Isa 10:20  And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth.
Isa 10:21  The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.
Isa 10:22  For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return[/b]: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.
Isa 10:23  For the Lord GOD of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land.    

Paul quotes from this Isaiah text in Romans 9:27:

Romans 9:27 - Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:  

And then in regard to the future prophesied remnant, Paul drops the anti-dispensational bomb of:

Romans 11:5 - Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.  

For the most part, the futurist millennium is representative of the Gospel period.  The fountain of living water is the same fountain from Zechariah 13:1.

...and still no one addresses why the apostles illuminate the hundreds of OT Scriptures (promises to Israel) as being applied to the new covenant body of Christ...

The church is the FULFILLMENT of the promises made to Israel - Jew and Gentile in one body in Christ (the Jewish Messiah).

Do you outright deny that John 19:37 (Calvary) is the fulfillment of Zechariah 12:10?

Yes or no?

[DaveW]

Do you outright deny that John 19:37 (Calvary) is the fulfillment of Zechariah 12:10?

Jn 19.37 Again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they pierced.

[EdwardGoodie]

Do you outright deny that John 19:37 (Calvary) is the fulfillment of Zechariah 12:10?

Jn 19.37 Again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they pierced.

[thethinker]

Seriousseeker wrote:

Edward, I think it is important that the Church be understood as not Jewish or Gentile, but as a "new testament" about the "Bride of Christ".

Yet the Bride of Christ has ONLY the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written upon her (Rev. 21:12). The names of Gentiles are NOT written upon her.

"Salvation is out of the Jews" so that men may worship God "in the spirit" (according to new covenant principles, John 4:21-24).

thinker