Author Topic: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church  (Read 2409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 38250
  • Manna: 796
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #70 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 17:02:58 »
Jesus (God) dying looks like it would nullify the divorce and allow him to re- “marry” his bride Israel or the grafted back on ones.

Offline Texas Conservative

  • Ethical Dissenter "All 8 Symptoms" Chief Justice! "Radical Political Conservative" Certified Resident Board Genius, it is...Directly. Observable.
  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11934
  • Manna: 396
  • My church is 100% right, Your church is 100% wrong
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #71 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 19:51:30 »
Jesus (God) dying looks like it would nullify the divorce and allow him to re- “marry” his bride Israel or the grafted back on ones.

It isn't needed.  In Jeremiah 3, God said AFTER saying He gave Israel a certificate of divorce:

11 The Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel is more righteous than unfaithful Judah. 12 Go, proclaim this message toward the north:

“‘Return, faithless Israel,’ declares the Lord,
    ‘I will frown on you no longer,
for I am faithful,’ declares the Lord,
    ‘I will not be angry forever.
13 Only acknowledge your guilt—
    you have rebelled against the Lord your God,
you have scattered your favors to foreign gods
    under every spreading tree,
    and have not obeyed me,’”
declares the Lord.

14 “Return, faithless people,” declares the Lord, “for I am your husband. I will choose you—one from a town and two from a clan—and bring you to Zion. 15 Then I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will lead you with knowledge and understanding. 16 In those days, when your numbers have increased greatly in the land,” declares the Lord, “people will no longer say, ‘The ark of the covenant of the Lord.’ It will never enter their minds or be remembered; it will not be missed, nor will another one be made. 17 At that time they will call Jerusalem The Throne of the Lord, and all nations will gather in Jerusalem to honor the name of the Lord. No longer will they follow the stubbornness of their evil hearts. 18 In those days the people of Judah will join the people of Israel, and together they will come from a northern land to the land I gave your ancestors as an inheritance.


Hosea is another book that shows even though Israel wandered off and was a harlot, that there will be restoration.

Offline Texas Conservative

  • Ethical Dissenter "All 8 Symptoms" Chief Justice! "Radical Political Conservative" Certified Resident Board Genius, it is...Directly. Observable.
  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11934
  • Manna: 396
  • My church is 100% right, Your church is 100% wrong
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #72 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 19:59:02 »
Texas Conservative:

   So there was a divorce of Israel, as per Jeremiah, you say? If a divorce occurred, and I am not objecting to your understanding of Jeremiah 3, then there must have been some kind of a reconciliation later because our Lord, while on the Mount Of Olives, looking over Jerusalem, cried out, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!" [Matt. 23:37-39 & Luke 21].

    Following those sorrowful words, in chapter 24, Jesus described the signs that pointed to the destruction and divorce of the very people and nation He loved, Israel. His loving remarks about His own people does not appear to have been a permanent divorce or separation that occurred in Jeremiah's day.

    The permanent divorce occurred in A. D. 67-70 when the entire Israeli system was wiped off the face of the earth, except for a small segment who were admonished to flee. Go to Luke 21 for more of a detailed history of what would and did happen.

    Furthermore, Josephus, the 1st century historian who lived in Jesus' day and recorded the Jewish/Roman War, echoes the very matters Jesus in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 prophesied.

    Also, if Israel's and Jerusalem's destruction did not entail a spiritual divorce, I will ask you again: How do you explain or translate what happened, and why?

Buff


Buff, this "AD 70 permanent divorce" stuff has no basis in scripture.  You are making this permanent divorce up, or someone filled you full of nonsense on this topic.  You appear to be ignorant of the OT, and this colors your reading of the NT.    The destruction of Jerusalem is not mentioned as a divorce.  You conflate a nation with a people.  Much like you have issues with the word "church."

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #72 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 19:59:02 »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3854
  • Manna: 95
  • Gender: Male
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #73 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 22:36:50 »
TEXAS CONSERVATIVE:

"The destruction of Jerusalem is not mentioned as a divorce."

    I hear you, but how do you describe what happened? We both agree Jerusalem and Old Israel ended in A. D. 67-70 in their War with the Roman Army, according to history. But why? Surely there must be a reason God withdrew from Old Israel.

    We both agree Old Israel committed spiritual adultery by "marrying" other gods and rejecting her Husband. Old Israel did this during most of her entire history, as the old scriptures corroborate. The marital relationship between God and Israel finally ended. Even Jesus prophesied of it in Matthew 24 and Luke 21. It is therefore self-evident God divorced His wife.

    What is the BIG hangup about you rejecting a term that describes exactly what occurred? Is it stubbornness? If you are willing to replace "divorce" with another term that describes the same episode, let's have it. I'll accept it! But I will inform you, like you are informing me, that the term you use is not mentioned. Both of us would be in the same pot!

    Correct reasoning and valid logic are two attributes that are essential in adequate communication, whether verbally or in written form. Both you and I should know that matters of biblical and secular material may be illustrated or characterized by employing terms that coincide with the message at hand without distorting or disturbing the core message.

    This is precisely what I have done. But you and DaveW rejected it. I've heard nothing from him since I called his hand on it. Well, enough is enough. I do not have sufficient time to "hop around the mulberry bush" any longer in search of something that does not exist.

Buff

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #73 on: Thu Jun 10, 2021 - 22:36:50 »

Offline DaveW

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16649
  • Manna: 199
  • Gender: Male
  • carrying Torah scroll
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #74 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 05:17:39 »
Buff - I have already shown that God divorced the Northern Kingdom, not the Southern one (Judah).

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #74 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 05:17:39 »



Offline Texas Conservative

  • Ethical Dissenter "All 8 Symptoms" Chief Justice! "Radical Political Conservative" Certified Resident Board Genius, it is...Directly. Observable.
  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11934
  • Manna: 396
  • My church is 100% right, Your church is 100% wrong
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #75 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 07:09:06 »
TEXAS CONSERVATIVE:

"The destruction of Jerusalem is not mentioned as a divorce."

    I hear you, but how do you describe what happened? We both agree Jerusalem and Old Israel ended in A. D. 67-70 in their War with the Roman Army, according to history. But why? Surely there must be a reason God withdrew from Old Israel.

    We both agree Old Israel committed spiritual adultery by "marrying" other gods and rejecting her Husband. Old Israel did this during most of her entire history, as the old scriptures corroborate. The marital relationship between God and Israel finally ended. Even Jesus prophesied of it in Matthew 24 and Luke 21. It is therefore self-evident God divorced His wife.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #75 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 07:09:06 »

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12470
  • Manna: 319
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #76 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 17:04:17 »
Brother I AGREE with you~our disagreement is before we can believe we MUST be born again! I know this sounds strange to your 80 plus years old ears, but IT IS THE TRUTH.
It doesn't sound strange; it sounds absolutely and completely wrong. Not only does it sound wrong, it sounds like a malevolent and malicious god is in charge.  That is the only conclusion.

Let's examine it.  According to that idea, the difference between those who are to be eternally alive and those who are to be eternally condemned is simply and only whether or not they are the elect of God, which according to your version of election, they have nothing to do with.  You might argue that since they have sinned, it is not really God who is responsible for their condemnation. But that is not even at issue here since all have sinned and it remains that the only reason that they end up to be eternally condemned is because they are not among the elect.  That they have sinned and deserve to be eternally condemned is not the discriminator here; the discriminator is that they are not among the elect, according to your version of election. 

Therefore, God has created a world in which the vast majority, or so it would seem, of human beings are the product of that creation for the sheer purpose of being eternally condemned.  So far as we know, God doesn't even subject any of the animals except man to be eternally condemned.  And because of that, it must be that, with only a few exceptions, mankind is the lowest of God's creations.

RB, that is what your version of election and regeneration [born again] demands.  There simply is no other description.  So then, no it is not strange to think that before we can believe we must be born again.  It is not strange, it is abhorrent to the point of the worst kind of heresy.

No I know that you do not think that about God, but that is the only way to think about God if you believe as you do about election and regeneration.  If God is the sole decision maker between who is to be among the elect and regenerated and who is not, then clearly it has nothing to do with man or that he is a sinner, since all are sinners.
« Last Edit: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 17:06:49 by 4WD »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3854
  • Manna: 95
  • Gender: Male
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #77 on: Fri Jun 11, 2021 - 17:38:19 »
DaveW:

    "Buff - I have already shown that God divorced the Northern Kingdom, not the Southern one (Judah)."

    Dave, my brother, this is completely off-center. For when Jesus foretold the destruction of Israel and Jerusalem, He did not make a distinction between Northern and Southern Israel. Additionally, when He sat upon the Mount of Olives, overlooking Jerusalem, and expressing a deep sorrow for them, He made zero differentiation.

    In both instances, He alluded to the whole of Israel, not just one section of her. And that is precisely what occurred in A. D. 67-70.

Kindly,

Buff

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13753
  • Manna: 367
  • Gender: Male
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #78 on: Wed Jun 16, 2021 - 11:47:42 »
DaveW:

    "Buff - I have already shown that God divorced the Northern Kingdom, not the Southern one (Judah)."

Dave, my brother, this is completely off-center.
No, Dave's right.  The Old Testament devotes a lot of space to making separate prophecies with regards to the northern and southern kingdoms.  To briefly summarize...

The southern kingdom was chastened by God for its apostasy by being sent into captivity, in the 6th century BC.  A portion of the populace was deported to Babylon, and then a fraction of that portion was further removed to Persia when Babylon was conquered.  The prophets say that their captivity will end and they will return and rebuild Jerusalem.  The Old Testament also records the fulfillment of these prophesies in Ezra and Nehemiah.

The northern kingdom was judged by God for its apostasy in the 8th century BC.  God brought the Assyrian army against them, and destroyed their kingdom.  This is the kingdom which God said he divorced.  The prophets call the Northern Kingdom "not a people" and "dry bones" but predict that it will be resurrected and made to live again.  The Old Testament does NOT record the fulfillment of these prophecies.  They were fulfilled, starting in the intertestamental period and extending into New Testament times.  Proselytes were baptized to become members of those tribes, causing a literal resurrection of the northern kingdom, in its historic lands.

When Jesus foretold the destruction of Israel and Jerusalem, He did not make a distinction between Northern and Southern Israel. Additionally, when He sat upon the Mount of Olives, overlooking Jerusalem, and expressing a deep sorrow for them, He made zero differentiation.

    In both instances, He alluded to the whole of Israel, not just one section of her. And that is precisely what occurred in A. D. 67-70.

Kindly,

Buff
Throughout Scripture, Jerusalem is synonymous with the southern kingdom - that is, Judah.  That the Lord sat overlooking Jerusalem points to a judgment of that group, specifically.

As for His words about the northern kingdom, I will quote:

Matthew 10:6  But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:24  But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

John 10:16  And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

It is clear that part of the Lord's mission upon this earth was to enact the resurrection of that old northern kingdom of Israel, through the making and baptizing of proselytes into it.  Further, He put out the call to the southern kingdom to join it together into a single kingdom.  A large part of them responded, and were baptized into a re-united Israel.  Another part did not respond to the call, and these were the ones who went into perdition - the branches who were "broken off."

Historically, we can see that the followers of Jesus heeded His warnings, and fled from Jerusalem when they saw the signs, avoiding the judgment that came in the form of the Roman army.  In the north as well, they refused to join the zealot uprisings, and largely escaped unscathed in the Roman decimations that occurred there.

Jarrod

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #78 on: Wed Jun 16, 2021 - 11:47:42 »

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9476
  • Manna: 415
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #79 on: Wed Jun 16, 2021 - 15:09:51 »
It doesn't sound strange; it sounds absolutely and completely wrong. Not only does it sound wrong, it sounds like a malevolent and malicious god is in charge.  That is the only conclusion.

Let's examine it.  According to that idea, the difference between those who are to be eternally alive and those who are to be eternally condemned is simply and only whether or not they are the elect of God, which according to your version of election, they have nothing to do with.  You might argue that since they have sinned, it is not really God who is responsible for their condemnation. But that is not even at issue here since all have sinned and it remains that the only reason that they end up to be eternally condemned is because they are not among the elect.  That they have sinned and deserve to be eternally condemned is not the discriminator here; the discriminator is that they are not among the elect, according to your version of election. 

Therefore, God has created a world in which the vast majority, or so it would seem, of human beings are the product of that creation for the sheer purpose of being eternally condemned.  So far as we know, God doesn't even subject any of the animals except man to be eternally condemned.  And because of that, it must be that, with only a few exceptions, mankind is the lowest of God's creations.

RB, that is what your version of election and regeneration [born again] demands.  There simply is no other description.  So then, no it is not strange to think that before we can believe we must be born again.  It is not strange, it is abhorrent to the point of the worst kind of heresy.

No I know that you do not think that about God, but that is the only way to think about God if you believe as you do about election and regeneration.  If God is the sole decision maker between who is to be among the elect and regenerated and who is not, then clearly it has nothing to do with man or that he is a sinner, since all are sinners.
I just saw this for the first time, so I will mark it for tomorrow. Sorry for missing this. RB

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12470
  • Manna: 319
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: “Replacement Theology”—or New Israel vs. Church
« Reply #80 on: Thu Jun 17, 2021 - 05:47:34 »
I just saw this for the first time, so I will mark it for tomorrow. Sorry for missing this. RB
No Problem.  In fact I didn't really expect a response.  I know your thinking on this matter.  But I will wait eagerly for it.

 

     
anything