REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY

Choir Loft

Active Member
Jan 27, 2018
244
72
Tampa
✟15,480.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
In the mid-1900's John Nelson Darby published a personal reinterpretation of history and Christian theology. Although Darby was neither theologian nor historian, the father of Dispensationalism and one time consort of witches supported heretical assertions such as a denial of the vicarious purpose of Christ’s obedience, imputed righteousness and an anti-semitic position that denied prophetic promises of a revived State of Israel (Ezekiel 37:1-14). His book provided the basis for the doctrine of Replacement Theology.

Darby's ideas were widely accepted and applauded by many including Bible publisher Cyrus Scofield and evangelist D.L. Moody. Darby’s dogma affected the American church so deeply that it permanently corrupted Protestant Christian ideology.

According to Darby’s Dispensationalist dogma, ancient Israel was destroyed by God and replaced by the church - hence the moniker Replacement Theology. According to Darby’s scenario the church thus became spiritual Israel - a metaphysical substitute for the real thing. In 1948 Divine Providence established the real State of Israel in fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy. The unique historic event destroyed the foundation of Darby's entire philosophical construction resulting in its logical collapse. But logic is not necessary to fuel the purposes of those who prefer to walk in darkness. Although the light of God revealed Darby’s demonic deception, the church refused to acknowledge the truth that now stares it in the face. The State of Israel is real and the spiritual identity of the church no longer agrees with Darby’s interpretation. Facts don’t lie, but liars can concoct any explanation that suits them.

Israel has always been a stumbling block in the spiritual heart of mankind and despite the inauguration of the modern State of Israel Darby’s dogmatic problem has continued to fester for over seventy years. Apart from the fact the church as spiritual Israel cannot be justified by scripture and apart from the fact that the State of Israel does indeed exist in real time, adherents of Darby’s anti-semitic dogma continue to refer to the church as spiritual Israel - replacing the real thing.

The doctrine of Replacement Theology doesn’t hold water and so the disciples of Darby, choosing to believe a lie, continue to walk in waterless places, spiritually speaking.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dorothy Mae

Barney2.0

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 1, 2017
6,003
2,336
Los Angeles
✟451,221.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In the mid-1900's John Nelson Darby published a personal reinterpretation of history and Christian theology. Although Darby was neither theologian nor historian, the father of Dispensationalism and one time consort of witches supported heretical assertions such as a denial of the vicarious purpose of Christ’s obedience, imputed righteousness and an anti-semitic position that denied prophetic promises of a revived State of Israel (Ezekiel 37:1-14). His book provided the basis for the doctrine of Replacement Theology.

Darby's ideas were widely accepted and applauded by many including Bible publisher Cyrus Scofield and evangelist D.L. Moody. Darby’s dogma affected the American church so deeply that it permanently corrupted Protestant Christian ideology.

According to Darby’s Dispensationalist dogma, ancient Israel was destroyed by God and replaced by the church - hence the moniker Replacement Theology. According to Darby’s scenario the church thus became spiritual Israel - a metaphysical substitute for the real thing. In 1948 Divine Providence established the real State of Israel in fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy. The unique historic event destroyed the foundation of Darby's entire philosophical construction resulting in its logical collapse. But logic is not necessary to fuel the purposes of those who prefer to walk in darkness. Although the light of God revealed Darby’s demonic deception, the church refused to acknowledge the truth that now stares it in the face. The State of Israel is real and the spiritual identity of the church no longer agrees with Darby’s interpretation. Facts don’t lie, but liars can concoct any explanation that suits them.

Israel has always been a stumbling block in the spiritual heart of mankind and despite the inauguration of the modern State of Israel Darby’s dogmatic problem has continued to fester for over seventy years. Apart from the fact the church as spiritual Israel cannot be justified by scripture and apart from the fact that the State of Israel does indeed exist in real time, adherents of Darby’s anti-semitic dogma continue to refer to the church as spiritual Israel - replacing the real thing.

The doctrine of Replacement Theology doesn’t hold water and so the disciples of Darby, choosing to believe a lie, continue to walk in waterless places, spiritually speaking.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
Well it’s very hard to equate the modern day state of Israel with the Biblical kingdom of Israel. Although both are Jewish states ruled by Jews, the modern state of Israel is a secular state that doesn’t rule by Torah law as ancient Israel did, the modern state of Israel and Judaism in general has no more temple, the modern state of Israel was founded through a legal UN mandate and of course the colonial powers who drew the borders of Israel along with all the Arab nations, it wasn’t founded through divine intervention, unless you count the Arab-Israeli wars. The real Israel remains in the heart of the believers and the Church of Jesus Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In the mid-1900's John Nelson Darby published a personal reinterpretation of history and Christian theology. Although Darby was neither theologian nor historian, the father of Dispensationalism and one time consort of witches supported heretical assertions such as a denial of the vicarious purpose of Christ’s obedience, imputed righteousness and an anti-semitic position that denied prophetic promises of a revived State of Israel (Ezekiel 37:1-14). His book provided the basis for the doctrine of Replacement Theology.

Darby's ideas were widely accepted and applauded by many including Bible publisher Cyrus Scofield and evangelist D.L. Moody. Darby’s dogma affected the American church so deeply that it permanently corrupted Protestant Christian ideology.

According to Darby’s Dispensationalist dogma, ancient Israel was destroyed by God and replaced by the church - hence the moniker Replacement Theology. According to Darby’s scenario the church thus became spiritual Israel - a metaphysical substitute for the real thing. In 1948 Divine Providence established the real State of Israel in fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy. The unique historic event destroyed the foundation of Darby's entire philosophical construction resulting in its logical collapse. But logic is not necessary to fuel the purposes of those who prefer to walk in darkness. Although the light of God revealed Darby’s demonic deception, the church refused to acknowledge the truth that now stares it in the face. The State of Israel is real and the spiritual identity of the church no longer agrees with Darby’s interpretation. Facts don’t lie, but liars can concoct any explanation that suits them.

Israel has always been a stumbling block in the spiritual heart of mankind and despite the inauguration of the modern State of Israel Darby’s dogmatic problem has continued to fester for over seventy years. Apart from the fact the church as spiritual Israel cannot be justified by scripture and apart from the fact that the State of Israel does indeed exist in real time, adherents of Darby’s anti-semitic dogma continue to refer to the church as spiritual Israel - replacing the real thing.

The doctrine of Replacement Theology doesn’t hold water and so the disciples of Darby, choosing to believe a lie, continue to walk in waterless places, spiritually speaking.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
Darby was a Dispensationalist, which is nothing at all like Replacement theology. In fact it's almost the exact opposite.
 
Upvote 0

David Kent

Continuing Historicist
Aug 24, 2017
2,173
663
86
Ashford Kent
✟116,777.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
Darby was a Dispensationalist, which is nothing at all like Replacement theology. In fact it's almost the exact opposite.

Absolutely. I think Darby was a false teacher, as he believed that the church and Israel would always be separate. The OP was full of lies.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Well, Israel were told that a new covenant was coming: Jeremiah 31:31-34

And they were told that the new covenant had come: Luke 22:20

And that Israel was not longer racial but spiritual: Matthew 3:9 Galatians 3:28

So holding to replacement theology is not without justification...is it.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, Israel were told that a new covenant was coming: Jeremiah 31:31-34

And they were told that the new covenant had come: Luke 22:20

And that Israel was not longer racial but spiritual: Matthew 3:9 Galatians 3:28

So holding to replacement theology is not without justification...is it.
Not imo.
I would say there has always been two Israels, the natural born and those who believed God and they included gentile proselytes, such as Ruth, who was adopted in.

Replacement theology says that the gentile church has taken the place of Israel, rather than the gentiles being grafted in or adopted in, to the Commonwealth of Israel.
I'm not sure what they do with the OT saints such as David, Ruth, Boaz, Isaiah, Moses, etc.
 
Upvote 0

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I'm not sure what they do with the OT saints such as David, Ruth, Boaz, Isaiah, Moses, etc.

But they did not get in because of their race. They got in because of their faith, which has always been the long-term point; in Deuteronomy 6:6 Moses himself wrote to prefigure the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-14
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But they did not get in because of their race. They got in because of their faith, which has always been the long-term point; in Deuteronomy 6:6 Moses himself wrote to prefigure the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-14
I agree.

Replacement theology says that the gentile church has taken the place of Israel, rather than the gentiles being grafted in or adopted in, to the Commonwealth of Israel.
 
Upvote 0

Inkfingers

Somebody's heretic
Supporter
May 17, 2014
5,638
1,548
✟160,762.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I agree.

Replacement theology says that the gentile church has taken the place of Israel, rather than the gentiles being grafted in or adopted in, to the Commonwealth of Israel.

Well, it has (hence no temple of actual rock).

The old kind of temple was replaced by the new kind; the body of Christ.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, it has (hence no temple of actual rock).

The old kind of temple was replaced by the new kind; the body of Christ.
Israel existed without a temple in the OT. Although they did have a tent tabernacle.
 
Upvote 0

David Kent

Continuing Historicist
Aug 24, 2017
2,173
663
86
Ashford Kent
✟116,777.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
Israel existed without a temple in the OT. Although they did have a tent tabernacle.

The temple is where God lives and now, that is in His Church,
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The temple is where God lives and now, that is in His Church,
Yes, His church is His people, the Body of Christ. Jew and Gentile.
 
Upvote 0

Choir Loft

Active Member
Jan 27, 2018
244
72
Tampa
✟15,480.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I agree.

Replacement theology says that the gentile church has taken the place of Israel, rather than the gentiles being grafted in or adopted in, to the Commonwealth of Israel.

Yes indeed, but it isn't Israel that's the root of the grafting.
Jesus is the root.
Branches both natural and wild have their life in Him.

The heresy of Replacement Theology is the pride of the gentiles - that they have somehow replaced Israel - replaced Christ Himself as the root.

They haven't.

Part of Israel has always remained grafted into the true vine - Jesus.
Part of the gentiles have been grafted into the true vine - Jesus.

Therefore both Israel and gentiles co-exist in the grace of Christ Jesus. Israel was never replaced by the gentiles. Either Replacement Theology is a lie or the Bible is lying to us. Both cannot exist in truth together....

But some of these branches from Abraham's tree--some of the people of Israel--have been broken off. And you Gentiles, who were branches from a wild olive tree, have been grafted in. So now you also receive the blessing God has promised Abraham and his children, sharing in the rich nourishment from the root of God's special olive tree. - Romans 11:17

Some of the branches of the olive tree were broken off so as to allow wild branches to be grafted in.
But what is the root? What is the tree. The root and the tree isn't Israel because Israel is described as one of the branches. All the branches are attached to something greater than themselves - Jesus the messiah.

Jesus is the root and the tree from which all draw justification and life - not Israel. "I am the life," Jesus said.

Therefore the root is Jesus and the natural branches that were broken off is Israel.
But only 'some' of Israel was broken off.
Some natural branches always remained attached to the root.

In every passage of scripture and among Jews to this day all references to Israel mean the same as references to Jews. Gentiles are not some figure or type of Jew. Gentiles are gentiles and Jews are Israel. The wild branches grafted in are gentiles - grafted into the root, meaning Christ.

Here is a mystery - how do wild and cultivated branches co-exist and what do they look like together?

When grafts are attached to a parent plant they continue to maintain their original nature. Therefore wild branches do not share the nature of the cultivated branches though they do indeed share life together in Christ. In plain terms, gentiles aren't obligated to keep the traditions of the Jews. Only the eternal law is required of each - meaning the original commandments.

While Israel isn't allowed to eat a cheese burger the wild branches (gentiles) may do so, but its never allowed of either natural or wild branches to take the Lord's name in vain or to have an adulterous affair with the neighbor's spouse.

Let gentiles not be proud of their blessings as though it was something they had obtained by their own efforts. At the end of the season the natural branches, which were cut off, will prophetically be grafted in again. (Romans 11:24-25) Those days have been upon us since 1947 and 1967.(*)

Replacement Theology never agreed with the context of the Bible, but it has been used by the demonic to cause pride to replace humility before Jesus, the Lord and root of both Israel and gentiles.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

(*)
1947 - Israel established once again as a sovereign nation among the community of nations.
The re-grafting of the remaining natural branches began and the State of Israel prospered once again.

1967 - Jerusalem, the traditional capital of Israel, was liberated by the IDF.
The times of the gentiles were fulfilled and the fortunes of the church began to wither. (Luke 21:24b)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
In every passage of scripture and among Jews to this day all references to Israel mean the same as references to Jews. Gentiles are not some figure or type of Jew. Gentiles are gentiles and Jews are Israel. The wild branches grafted in are gentiles - grafted into the root, meaning Christ.
There is no Jew or Gentile in Christ. We are all God's chosen people. We are all citizens of the Commonwealth of Israel. We can see the type and anti-type. Ruth, a gentile, became a citizen of the nation of Israel with all the same rights, promises, and responsibilities of the naturally born Jewish woman.

Eph. 2:12-17
That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
copyChkboxOff.gif

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.


imv, both dispensational and replacement theologies have to ignore these scriptures and many more.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: David Kent
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

David Kent

Continuing Historicist
Aug 24, 2017
2,173
663
86
Ashford Kent
✟116,777.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
In the mid-1900's John Nelson Darby published a personal reinterpretation of history and Christian theology. Although Darby was neither theologian nor historian, the father of Dispensationalism and one time consort of witches supported heretical assertions such as a denial of the vicarious purpose of Christ’s obedience, imputed righteousness and an anti-semitic position that denied prophetic promises of a revived State of Israel
I think Darby was a heretic, but this opening post is FULL of LIES. Darby was dead by the mid 1900's He started his dispensationalism in the first half of the 19th century, the 1800's. He got the idea from Edward Irving. I have read a lot about Darby but there is no suggestion that he consorted with witches. His early colleague, Benjamin Wills Newton, who later split from him, thought Darby was a secret Jesuit , which is probably true as he certainly adopted Jesuit teachings.

If you cannot be more honest in your postings, we cannot believe anything you write. What is the book you refer to and can you quote from it?

There is enough to condemn Darby as a heretic without using lies.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

LastSeven

Amil
Supporter
Sep 2, 2010
5,205
1,046
Edmonton, Alberta
✟154,576.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I agree.

Replacement theology says that the gentile church has taken the place of Israel, rather than the gentiles being grafted in or adopted in, to the Commonwealth of Israel.
I think you're arguing about semantics. Personally I don't like the term "replacement theology" because it's easy to misunderstand the theory based on that label alone.

One could technically argue that the church has replaced Israel in the sense that the new covenant has replaced the old, but I think it's more accurate to say that citizenship in Israel is no longer determined by lineage but by faith in Christ. So it's not so much a replacement, as a redefinition of Israel.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think you're arguing about semantics. Personally I don't like the term "replacement theology" because it's easy to misunderstand the theory based on that label alone.

One could technically argue that the church has replaced Israel in the sense that the new covenant has replaced the old, but I think it's more accurate to say that citizenship in Israel is no longer determined by lineage but by faith in Christ. So it's not so much a replacement, as a redefinition of Israel.
Question: "What is replacement theology / supersessionism?"

Answer:
Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel. Among the different views of the relationship between the church and Israel are the church has replaced Israel (replacement theology), the church is an expansion of Israel (covenant theology), or the church is completely different and distinct from Israel (dispensationalism/premillennialism).
What is replacement theology / supersessionism?
What is Covenant Theology?
What is new covenant theology?

The thing to remember with dispensational theology is that there is a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church. They are two different people with two different destinies in God’s economy.

This is especially evident in the fact that covenant theology does not see a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church. Both entities are seen as one continuous people of God with one ultimate destiny.

All of that serves as the backdrop to view new covenant theology. As mentioned previously, new covenant theology is a middle point between the two. It shares a lot in common with classic covenant theology, in particular the continuity between the Church and Israel as being one people of God. However, it also differs from covenant theology in that it does not necessarily view the Scriptures as the unfolding of redemption in a covenant of works/covenant of grace framework. Instead, it sees the Scriptures in a more promise/fulfillment paradigm.

As a new covenant theology believer I'm looking forward to.....

11I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 12Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

They are missing family members. :(
 
Upvote 0

David Kent

Continuing Historicist
Aug 24, 2017
2,173
663
86
Ashford Kent
✟116,777.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Conservative
Dispensationalism says that there is no hint of the church in the OT and that "The Church Age" is a parenthesis in Israel's history, and is God's "Plan B"

That is a false teaching. The Church has always been God's master plan.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Choir Loft

Active Member
Jan 27, 2018
244
72
Tampa
✟15,480.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Dispensationalism says that there is no hint of the church in the OT and that "The Church Age" is a parenthesis in Israel's history, and is God's "Plan B"

That is a false teaching. The Church has always been God's master plan.

Chapter and verse please.

Where in the Bible does it say that the church has always been God's master plan? This is a doctrine of demons. The Bible neither expressly states nor implies such a thing.

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons." - 1 Timothy 4:1

The master plan, if such a conjecture can be stated, is that those who surrender to Christ be saved. The Jew first, then the gentile.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. - Romans 1:16

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
 
Upvote 0