Please Stop Saying "Replacement Theology"

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Nope. They could and did.
Do you believe their ministry is still future or do you believe it was in the past.

Either way - please tell me about in a straightforward way. I.e. don't be obtuse. That will get us nowhere.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you believe their ministry is still future or do you believe it was in the past.

Luke 21:20-23 plainly places the Great Tribulation event in the apostles' lifetimes when the Romans surrounded Jerusalem (AD 66-70). The apostles saw the armies surround the city, as Jesus told them they would. How did they escape this great tribulation - (great distress upon the land and wrath upon its people)? Simply by fleeing Jerusalem and ancient Judea. This took place for them as Jesus promised.

Christians for 20 centuries have understood that the great tribulation is past and pertained to AD 66-70. The few today who that think it is not, are letting the fiction of the Left Behind series teach them instead of the bible.

The great tribulation/great distress is long since passed. It took place when the apostles saw Jerusalem surrounded by Roman armies and then fled ancient Judea (Luke 21:20-23). Such was understood by the majority of Christian leaders and scholars until the Left Behind/Late Great Planet Earth books made biblical and historical ignorance a cottage industry.

Is that straightforward enough?
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,678
18,559
Orlando, Florida
✟1,262,020.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm not even sure that "supersessionism" really accurately describes anyone's viewpoint. I also see this as a misunderstanding of covenant theology. Does anyone willingly take this label for themselves?

I'd be curious to learn more about this from the Reformed perspective. I understand traditionally, the Lutheran perspective was that the Old Testament promises to Israel are fulfilled in the Church. We do not accept dispensationalist eschatologies or reading of the Scriptures.

If the OT promises were not fulfilled by God in the Church, then we simply do not have a Gospel as we have understood it, we have a different religion where disobedience and obedience, faith and unbelief are all equal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

A Realist

Living in Reality
Dec 27, 2018
1,371
1,335
Georgia
✟67,536.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Whether or not you will be allowed to continue post in the "Christain Only" sections of CF after making such a public proclamation, remains to be seen.
In order to post in the Christian Only sections, I must hold to the CF Statement of Faith, which I do.
CF Statement of Faith | Christian Forums

The Statement of Faith says nothing about believing that the bible as translated today is infallible.

IOW, I am allowed to be here and have violated none of the CF forum rules.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

His student

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2019
1,235
555
78
Northwest
✟48,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Christians for 20 centuries have understood that the great tribulation is past and pertained to AD 66-70.
Some have and some haven't.
The few today who that think it is not, are letting the fiction of the Left Behind series teach them instead of the bible.......Such was understood by the majority of Christian leaders and scholars until the Left Behind/Late Great Planet Earth books made biblical and historical ignorance a cottage industry.
I have never read the "Left Behind" books and don't intend to.

Most pretrib scholars either lived before the Left Behind books or have never read them.
The great tribulation/great distress is long since passed. It took place when the apostles saw Jerusalem surrounded by Roman armies and then fled ancient Judea (Luke 21:20-23).
Those events, as horrific as they no doubt were, could not have fulfilled what the Lord told them about.

""For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will." Matthew 24:21

The siege and destruction of Jerusalem was not the greatest tribulation in the history of the earth until then and it wasn't even close to that of the holocaust in the future.
Is that straightforward enough?
Very straight forward. Thank you.

It is also very wrong IMO.

Tell me about your view of the future Millennium if you don't mind.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I need not justify my beliefs to you or how I came about them. :oldthumbsup:
Fair enough. Then I need not Justify to you the fact the all land promises were fulfilled to Israel either i suppose..no matter how many times you ask me to.
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Comparing scripture with scripture quickly demonstrates this usage of "ever was nor ever shall be":

Scripture tells us in 1 Kings 3:12 that there was "no king like Solomon before or after him." Such statements are then repeated in 2 Kings 18:5-6 of Hezekiah and in 2 Kings 23:25 of Josiah. Obviously, they can't all be the greatest King there ever was nor ever shall be. (And, of course, Jesus Christ surpasses even Solomon -- Matt. 12:42). Furthermore, this same Old Testament idea of "never will be again" is employed of various judgments that have already been fulfilled such as locusts in Egypt (Ex. 10:12-15; cf. Joel 1:1-4), a cry in Egypt (Ex. 11:6), and judgment upon O.T. Israel (Ez. 5:9; Joel 2:2). The Ezekiel 5:9 passage is especially instructive to us, for it states that the Babylonian conquest of Israel (sixth-century BC) would be the greatest judgment God had ever brought upon a nation, past or future, and yet AD70 far surpassed it...Therefore, we recognize that the expression "ever was/nor ever shall be" is a common Hyperbolic Hebraic idiom that the prophets of God used quite frequently.

St. Luke's account of this great tribulation reads as follows:
"These are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people." (Luke 21:22-23)

Without question, Jesus promised his apostles that they would live to see Israel's great tribulation ("great distress in the land and wrath upon this people") and all those things come to pass in their generation (Matthew 24:33-34; Luke 21:31-32).

Even so, AD 66-70 was the greatest Day-of-the-Lord event in Israel's history, and was, unquestionably, the one Christ's followers spoke of mere decades before it transpired. This was the same Day of the Lord concerning which the apostles stated they would remain alive unto its passing (1 Thess 5:2-4,23; Phil 1:6,10; Heb 10:25,36-39; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 1 Cor 5:5). Due to the covenantal significance of the event, that Day of the Lord's vengeance (cf. Luke 21:20-22; Isa 61:2; Jer 46:10) can never be repeated.

That bears repeating.

Due to the covenantal significance of the event, that Day of the Lord's vengeance (cf. Luke 21:20-22; Isa 61:2; Jer 46:10) can never be repeated.

There is no equal to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).

The Bible itself proves there is no literal earthly millennium. The "evidence" is in the apostolic eschatological doctrine that prohibits any view of the "millennium" that portrays it as a future, literal, earthly epoch. A simple examination of the NT epistles shows that there is no future historical "thousand-years" period. We know this with certainty, for the apostles explicitly identified the precise timing of the resurrection, the judgment, and the New Heaven/Earth -- they all occur at the precice time of the coming of Jesus Christ, thus proving that there is no literal "thousand years" that separates these events out over time.

(1) The resurrection occurs at the coming of Christ (1 Cor 15:23)

(2) The judgment occurs at the coming of Christ (2 Tim 4:1; Rev 11:15-18)

(3) The "New Heavens/Earth" occurs at the coming of Christ -- i.e., the "thief's coming," the "day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3:10/1 Thess 5:2)

These key eschatological events all occur at the coming of Jesus Christ. THEREFORE, as the apostles themselves understood, there is no literal, historic millennium.

As we all know, the popular dispensational/millennialist maps separate these three eschatological events by a period of 1000 historic years--or, in some cases, 1007 years. The bible doesn't allow it. The bible proves there is no literal earthly "millennium." Once we understand the plain truth of this, we can turn our efforts to understanding the apostolic teaching of the "thousand years" as a typological symbol--one of many in John's highly typological and symbolic vision.

What is it a Typological Symbol of?
The Thousand years is a typological reference to the length of the Davidic Monarchy, from David, the first King in the line, to Christ, the Final, and Completion/Restoration of the Line, which is a period of... wait for it......1000 years!

The "Thousand years" shows that Christ fulfilled the hopes of the Davidic Monarchy that Christ would fill David's office as King (Luke 1:68-69; Acts 2:30-36; 1 Timothy 1:17; Mark 11:10; ) and restore the tabernacle of David (Acts 15:16-17) so that all the gentile nations could join in to the true worship of Jehovah. The 1000 years shows a completed Monarchy instead of the fact that the Monarchy had fallen into ruin in the 500s BC via the Babylonian captivity.

David and Christ being the only 2 Kings in the line that matter, David the type, Christ the antitype, or fulfillment.

Christ fulfilled what all other kings in the line failed to do, thus bringing completion to, and fulfilling the purpose for, the Davidic monarchy, which was the "1000 year reign".

Again, the idea of a thousand years reign with Israel's Monarchy was an Old Testament hope -- one that was wished for but failed. The hopes of this glorious reign were laid out when Solomon took the throne after David. It was said that Israel would walk in the covenant blessings, and so much so that the Gentiles would come into the covenant (such as the Queen of Sheba's homage to Solomon). However, the "tabernacle of David" began to quickly crumble, and fell into total ruin by the time of the Babylonian exile. This all summarizes an OT type. Now, fast-forward to all the NT typology about Jesus being the TRUE "son of David" who was born as THE MESSIANIC HEIR to David's throne for raising up the Monarchy. This is what Revelation 20 is doing. It is using the Davidic Monarchy typology and applying it to Christ and the martyr-kings who reign in the Christic Monarchy, and it does so in exactly the same typological sense as other types we are more familiar with (Jesus is the "sacrifical lamb," etc). In Revelation 20 we see Jesus and his tribulation-martyr-kings reign; they defeat satan; they bring in the gentiles; and they judge the world. These are all the things hoped for in the OT times, but fulfilled in Jesus Christ and the New Covenant Church. The Church has all dominion with Christ over heaven and earth, satan was defeated, the gentles are now in the covenant, and Christ and the Church are the judges of the whole world.
This all sounds a lot like partial-Preterism. As you say, the issues you mention were orthodox, non-controversial beliefs for 2,000 years of Church history. Even now, it's the alternative viewpoints which lack a significant historical pedigree.

Good post.
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius the Kiwi

Dissident
Mar 2, 2013
7,085
3,768
✟290,977.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I simply consider it an inaccurate descriptive of the position those of us who believe Israel to be the Church take. It suggests a fundamental disconnect between the Old and New Covenants. God didn't replace the Jews, he opened up the membership as his children to Gentiles through Christ which the Jews rejected. The New Covenant is not the same as the Old but it draws it's lineage of believers from there and sees Christ as the fulfillment. How can the Church then be replacing anyone?

It's not as if the Jews have no place in God's plan within this idea, I believe Paul was quite clear that the unbelieving Jews will have to reconciled towards the end.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,678
18,559
Orlando, Florida
✟1,262,020.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
Well, I'd be interested in how you reconcile the belief in a fallible Bible with the Belief in Jesus?
Maybe you have your own, personal, private definition of "Christain" that you alone hold?

You can certainly self identify as a Christian and believe the Bible is fallible, this is a free country...Whether or not you will be allowed to continue post in the "Christain Only" sections of CF after making such a public proclamation, remains to be seen.

CF has a much more strict definition of what Constitutes a "Christian" for the purposes of being allowed to post in Christain only section of their private message board than the US Constitution does for the purposes of standing in the public square and claiming to be Christian...

Many Christians in the US do not subscribe to biblical inerrancy. But then my definition of who is a Christian includes more than evangelical fundamentalists, and also includes Catholics and historic Protestant churches.
 
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

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,510
7,861
...
✟1,194,809.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The term "replacement theology" is not helpful because:
  1. It is uncharitable. It does not seek to listen to or understand covenant theology, but rather to dismiss it without giving it a proper hearing.

  2. It is pejorative. It's meant to cause harm by making our views seem ridiculous and not worthy of consideration.

  3. It is not accurate. No one would assume this label for themselves because no one believes that the church has "replaced" Israel. When this label is used, what comes across is that our views have not really been understood and the person that we're communicating with does not care to take the time to understand our views.
So please stop using the term "replacement theology". Thanks!

Yes, there are real people claiming to believe in the term or belief called "replacement theology."

 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,510
7,861
...
✟1,194,809.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The term "replacement theology" is not helpful because:
  1. It is uncharitable. It does not seek to listen to or understand covenant theology, but rather to dismiss it without giving it a proper hearing.

  2. It is pejorative. It's meant to cause harm by making our views seem ridiculous and not worthy of consideration.

  3. It is not accurate. No one would assume this label for themselves because no one believes that the church has "replaced" Israel. When this label is used, what comes across is that our views have not really been understood and the person that we're communicating with does not care to take the time to understand our views.
So please stop using the term "replacement theology". Thanks!

Also, read these articles here:

Bible.ca uses the term Replacement Theology and calls it the gospel.
Replacement Theology, supersessionism: Christians are God's Jews. The church is true Israel.

Andy Stanley:
A Response to Andy Stanley's 'Irresistible' Replacement Theology
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

GingerBeer

Cool and refreshing with a kick!
Mar 26, 2017
3,511
1,348
Australia
✟119,825.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It's fundamental to Christianity to believe that Jesus Christ is the seed through which all the nations of the Earth are to be blessed. They are blessed by believing in Jesus. Once they believe and are baptised they are in Christ. And being in Christ makes them Abraham's seed in Christ so they receive the blessings that natural and unbelieving descendants of Abraham do not receive. Being born of Jewish parents does not bring a blessing as long as Christ is rejected but when the one born of Jewish parents believes in Jesus then they receive the blessings just like all others who are in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Nige55

Newbie
Mar 2, 2012
801
222
✟68,732.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Find me a person who willingly assumes this label for themselves and I will soften my approach a bit.

No idea how you're not seeing it, I hear and read it several, no, many times every week. I've known many church leaders who openly state it. My family and I have left churches because it's been such an agenda issue, pushed so strongly.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tampasteve
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

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Anyway, this is not "evidence". You have no facts or body of information to support it.

Since when do you require any sort of "Facts" or "Evidence" before you will personally subscribe to a particular theory?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,534
4,827
57
Oregon
✟799,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Many Christians in the US do not subscribe to biblical inerrancy. But then my definition of who is a Christian includes more than evangelical fundamentalists, and also includes Catholics and historic Protestant churches.
So does mine.. in fact I'd argue I have an even more liberal definition than you do.
As Far As I'm concerned, you can call yourself Christian simply because you saw the image of Jerry Garcia in your toast this morning.

I just probably won't debate scripture with you once I find out that is your foundation.

Iron Sharpens Iron, Marshmallows don't Sharpen Iron.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Nige55
Upvote 0

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Site Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So does mine.. in fact I'd argue I have an even more liberal definition than you do.
As Far As I'm concerned, you can call yourself Christian simply because you saw the image of Jerry Garcia in your toast this morning.

I just probably won't debate scripture with you once I find out that is your foundation.

Iron Sharpens Iron, Marshmallows don't Sharpen Iron.
The heart of stone becoming the a heart of flesh can go thru many changes. What denominationalism has to do with it is beyond me.
 
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