# Replacement Theology



## Average Joey (Feb 2, 2005)

I have been debating some people on this topic.What are your thoughts?


----------



## ReformedWretch (Feb 2, 2005)

My first thought is that the term "replacement" is slanderous and used to scare people away from rational discussion.


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 2, 2005)

How about "Fulfillment" theology?


----------



## ReformedWretch (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> How about "Fulfillment" theology?



I like that


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 2, 2005)

The doctrine is simply a part of Covenant Theology, and the only theological system that can deny the doctrine is Dispensationalism, and to do so it must ignore the plain teaching of Scripture:

-Matthew 3:9 "And do not presume to say to yourselves [Pharisees and Sadducees], 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I [John the Baptist] tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham." (Also Luke 3:8)
-Luke 19:9-10 (emphasis mine) "And Jesus said to him [Zacchaeus], 'Today salvation has come to this house, _since he also is a son of Abraham_. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.'"
-John 8:39-41 "They [Jews] answered him [Jesus], ‘Abraham is our father.’ Jesus said to them, 'If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing what Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing what your father [the devil] did….'"
-Acts 15:8-9 (emphasis mine) "And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them [the Gentiles], by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us [the Jews], and _he made no distinction between us and them_, having cleansed their hearts by faith."
-Romans 2:28-29 "For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God."
-Romans 4:11-12 "He [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose [of circumcision] was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised."
-Romans 4:17-18 (emphasis mine) "As it is written, 'I [God] have made you [Abraham] the father of _many nations_'—in the presence of the God in whom he believed…that he should become the father of _many nations_, as he had been told, 'So shall your offspring be.'"
-Romans 9:6-7 "…For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring…."
-Romans 15:8-9 (emphasis mine) "For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, _in order to_ confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, and _in order that_ the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy…."
-1 Corinthians 1:22-24 "For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."
-Galatians 3:7-9 (emphasis mine) "Know then that _it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham_. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, 'In you shall _all the nations_ be blessed.' So then, _those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham_, the man of faith."
-Galatians 3:13-14 (emphasis mine) "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree'—so that _in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles_, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith."
-Galatians 3:28-29 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise."
-Ephesians 2:11-22
-Hebrews 8:13 "In speaking of a new covenant [with Israel, the church], he [God] makes the first one [with Israel, the nation] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away."
-1 Peter 3:6 "…as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children [and thus Abraham’s children], if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening."


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Feb 2, 2005)

Take em' to Romans 11.

There is still a remnant of national/ethnic Israel saved by Grace. These people alone are how God has 'not abandoned His people'. Even in the OT, God worked ONLY through a remnant - the rest were cut off. There IS coming a future time when God will restore and save the entire nation of Israel (11:25-26, Zech. 13:8, 14:4), but until then, national Israel as a whole are enemies of the cross.

Kerry
The semi-progressive dispensationalist guy.


----------



## ReformedWretch (Feb 2, 2005)

Joe;

From my experience, you may as well save your breath with most of the people you are talking with. It's been my experience (with some prompting from Scott B) that unless a person sees the scripture clearly once it is presented to them, no ammount of coaxing, pleading, sweet talking, etc. is going to convince them.

Unless you are talking to someone who is at least vaguely intrested and has the attitude of wanting to hear more, you may be wasting your time. That's hard for me to say because I have many freinds and family who believe that I now believe in "replacement theology".


----------



## Average Joey (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by houseparent_
> Joe;
> 
> From my experience, you may as well save your breath with most of the people you are talking with. It's been my experience (with some prompting from Scott B) that unless a person sees the scripture clearly once it is presented to them, no ammount of coaxing, pleading, sweet talking, etc. is going to convince them.
> ...



Ordinarily,I would agree with you.But,I used to agree with dispensationalists.It took some good arguements(God letting me hear) for me to see the truth.Believe it or not it was on Rapture Ready that I saw this truth.Where I am currently debating this on.


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 2, 2005)

It takes a lot of patience to introduce this subject to folks who are stepped in dispensational presuppositions. I know this first hand from my eschatology course I taught last year at our church. If they want to learn, they will be teachable. If they want to live in Left Behind fantasy land, they won't be.


----------



## BobVigneault (Feb 2, 2005)

As with so many truths of scripture, they mean nothing to folks who have based their beliefs on emotional response. Usually the emotional response grows out of an investment, whether it be time or money, in a particular world view. 

I was recently in a Christian's house where there were all kinds of magazines on Israel, the future of Israel, Israel in prophecy. There were books on the same topics. Anything but a dispensational view would not be tolerated. 

It's frustrating because we know that CT is not spurned for scriptural reasons but spurned because of the investment folks have made in Dispensational publications and in what the talking heads of popular Christianity are spouting.


----------



## BobVigneault (Feb 2, 2005)

Yeah, what Rick said while I was stumbled through my own post!


----------



## LadyFlynt (Feb 2, 2005)

That is how the title of the thread makes me at times. I can agree with a Fulfillment not a Replacement.

There are calvinists in both camps. One believes that there are none of Israel left to be saved, no elect, all of Israel is reprobate and hell-bound...these are the same type of ppl who stood by and call the Jews "Christ-killers" and thus why many Dispensationalists remain their position. In the other camp are ppl the are willing to distinquish between the physical state and the spiritual state...Covenant Theology as a thread running throughout time and fullfilled through Christ. In EVERY nation there are reprobate and elect. Israel was used as an example of this to the world.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> 
> I was recently in a Christian's house where there were all kinds of magazines on Israel, the future of Israel, Israel in prophecy. There were books on the same topics.



HEY!!! I have all kinds of things in my house on Israel too! We even celebrate Passover and Sukot! Get over it!
I still believe in "Shalu Shalom, Yerusaleyim!" just as we should anywhere else....

[Edited on 2-2-2005 by LadyFlynt]


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 2, 2005)

Indeed, to claim that _all_ of national Israel is forever reprobate is an over-reaction against the common Dispensationalism of our day. When Romans 11 is read in context, it most likely refers to ethnic Jews, and thus does indeed say that God still promises to save many people from among them. But that is a completely different thing from saying that they are still in covenant with God as a nation in any sense, or continuing observance of some of the ceremonial aspects of the Israeli covenant that have been fulfilled at the Cross.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Feb 2, 2005)

Agreed....for the most part (thinking that that last bit may have been a critique of my Passover observance?)


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Agreed....for the most part (thinking that that last bit may have been a critique of my Passover observance?)



There's a difference between observing the Passover out of law-observance, and observing it as a learning experience. Last passover I wanted to have a passover dinner, but couldn't find enough people. Maybe this year!


----------



## tcalbrecht (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> How about "Fulfillment" theology?



It's called supersessionism.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> Indeed, to claim that _all_ of national Israel is forever reprobate is an over-reaction against the common Dispensationalism of our day. When Romans 11 is read in context, it most likely refers to ethnic Jews, and thus does indeed say that God still promises to save many people from among them. But that is a completely different thing from saying that they are still in covenant with God as a nation in any sense, or continuing observance of some of the ceremonial aspects of the Israeli covenant that have been fulfilled at the Cross.



I recall when James Jordan was taken to task by Steve Schlissel for suggesting that the promises Romans 11 to ethnic Jews might have been limited to the 1st century. He especially made the point that ethnic Jews could be readily identified in the 1st century, something that is very difficult to do today. 

Schlissel's response, as I recall, was more emotional than theological in nature. There are some thorny questions regarding the futurist interpretation of Romans 11, e.g., is every self-identified Jew today included in this promise regardless of ethnic/cultural background?


----------



## tcalbrecht (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> ...



Will you also slaughter a lamb and sprinkle its blood as part of the "experience"?


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by tcalbrecht_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> ...



No, it would probably be chicken.


----------



## BobVigneault (Feb 2, 2005)

Out of respect for your rituals Colleen I will slip on my ephod and put some extra horseraddish on my reuben.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by tcalbrecht_
> ...



How does a chicken represent Christ?


----------



## ReformedWretch (Feb 2, 2005)

> Schlissel's response, as I recall, was more emotional than theological in nature. There are some thorny questions regarding the futurist interpretation of Romans 11, e.g., is every self-identified Jew today included in this promise regardless of ethnic/cultural background?



Excellent points!

I do not hold to the view that all Israel is retrobate in any way shape or form, but I have not been totally convinced that Romans 11 cannot be taken Preteristically either. I am not sold either way.


----------



## Average Joey (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by houseparent_
> 
> 
> > Schlissel's response, as I recall, was more emotional than theological in nature. There are some thorny questions regarding the futurist interpretation of Romans 11, e.g., is every self-identified Jew today included in this promise regardless of ethnic/cultural background?
> ...



One sure thing about us Reformed Christians is we are never consistant on our eschatological beliefs.


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 2, 2005)

> How does a chicken represent Christ?



It cares for it's chicks?

[Edited on 2-2-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## Answerman (Feb 3, 2005)

Looks like this thread could be broken up into one called “Messianic Judiasm and Passover”

I thought about posting this yesterday but did not have time to finish so I will post what I have to contribute so far, and hopefully find time to expand on this initial post.

I totally agree with this statement. Dispensationalists usually use the term “replacement” to poison the well before any actual discussion takes place. I guess if we wanted to return the favor, we could call what they believe something like, “Plan B theology” or “Future splitting of Christ’s bride theology” or “Return to the shadows theology”… I am sure that we could probably come up with more put I think you get the point.

The best definition that I had heard for a long time was Remnant Theology, that is until I heard it called Expansion Theology which I think captures the biblical description even better.

Here’s an article where I first heard it called remnant theology:

http://www.leaderu.com/theology/remnanttheo.html

Here’s the first article that I saw that calls it expansion:

http://www.chaim.org/xpansion.htm

And here are a couple more that deal with this issue:

http://www.chaim.org/israelology.htm

http://www.chaim.org/reformers.html

And one that is more broad in scope by Richard Pratt:

http://www.rockofisrael.com/ToTheJewFirstE.htm

I have found that the most powerful arguments for trying to demonstrate that this was the apostles own view is, how all the prophecies that dispensationalist say are still future are dealt with by the divinely inspired interpreters or commentators (that is the NT writers) in the NT itself.

For example:

The prophecy of Elijah: Luke 1:17 "He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." Matt 11:14 "And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come. Mark 9:13 "But I say to you that Elijah has also come, and they did to him whatever they wished, as it is written of him." 

The kingdom of God/Heaven: Matt 21:43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. Matt 8:12 "But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt 25:30 'And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' Luke 17:20-21 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 "nor will they say, 'See here!' or 'See there!' For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you."

Joel’s prophecy: Acts 2:16 "But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel… 

The Davidic covenant: Acts 2:30-31 "Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31"he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption.

The rebuilding of David’s fallen tent: Acts 15:15-17 "And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: 16 'After this I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will set it up;
17 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the Lord who does all these things.'

*O Palmer Robertson has a good critique of how dispensationalists try to get around the gravity of this passage.

The Abrahamic covenant: Heb 11:10 for he waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God… 14-16 For those who say such things declare plainly that they seek a homeland. 15 And truly if they had called to mind that country from which they had come out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them.

The New covenant: Hebrews 8

How God has chosen to include the Gentiles into “one body”: Ephesians 2:11-22

The verses included in Chris’ post are also very helpful.

I would like to expand on this thread when I get the time by giving examples of the line of questioning that I use for each of these passages to demonstrate that the Bible clearly teaches a form of “replacement”, “remnant” or “expansion” theology, however you want to call it.

In Christ
David


----------



## Scott Bushey (Feb 3, 2005)

Thread split for clearity.

New Thread: Passover

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=8961

SPB

[Edited on 2-3-2005 by Scott Bushey]


----------

