Supersessionism

[Ken Rank]

Yes, there is that distinction but when I said 'Jews' I meant generically those believing through the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

The word Jew comes from Judah... there were no Jews during the time of Abraham. If you doubt me on this one... just go to the bible and find the word "Jew" before Mt. Sinai. Let me know if you do.

There are some physical promises that were given to them that weren't given to the Church...yes the Church shares in the spiritual blessings of Israel though.

I don't agree with this at all but we don't have to agree on this. Not a big deal. Be blessed.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Romans 11

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Romans 11

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I do not see how the branch off a tree or stem off a vine can consider itself separate or apart from the tree or vine. We have the same root and for the most part of them they have not completely "seen" their inheritance yet or recognize that we share in it. And rather odd IMO for Protestants to talk about a connection to that common root but not the branch that connects them to it.

 

[david.d]

I do not see how the branch off a tree or stem off a vine can consider itself separate or apart from the tree or vine. We have the same root and for the most part of them they have not completely "seen" their inheritance yet or recognize that we share in it. And rather odd IMO for Protestants to talk about a connection to that common root but not the branch that connects them to it.

I don't think I can say it any better than that.

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Romans 2:28‭-‬29 KJV

 

[crossnote]

I don't think I can say it any better than that.

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Romans 2:28‭-‬29 KJV

Look at the context of that in Rom 2. Paul is making a distiction between those Jews who have the law but no faith and those Jews who have both.
Nothing to do with the Gentiles in context..

Romans 2:17-19,28-29 NASB
[17] But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, [18] and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, [19] and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, [28] For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. [29] But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

 

[david.d]

Look at the context of that in Rom 2. Paul is making a distiction between those Jews who have the law but no faith and those Jews who have both.
Nothing to do with the Gentiles in context..

Romans 2:17-19,28-29 NASB
[17] But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, [18] and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, [19] and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, [28] For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. [29] But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

I have to disagree...

For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Romans 2:24‭-‬26 KJV

 

[Meowzltov]

I don't think I do. But, give me a quick definition of it and I'll see.

• The Church is the New Israel, meaning:
• God is now done with the original Israel
• All the promises given to Israel now belong to the Church
• The Jews are now a cursed people, doomed to exile

 

[Meowzltov]

Your view of Romans 11 and mine are probably not in line. No matter... just replying to say that there is a distinction between Judah and Israel (or Judah and Joseph or Judah and Ephraim) over 160 times in the Tanach. There are times when they are being used interchangeably, but that is more in the NT than the OT.

So long as everyone understands that bth Judah and Ephraim are Children of Israel, or just "Israel" as the NT abbreviates it.

 

[Meowzltov]

I find the whole distinction thing between Jew/Judah/Israel etc., very obfuscating as the terms are often interchangeable. So people pick their specialized definition to make a case.
There were promises given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the believing twelve tribes that do not pertain to the Church, especially dealing with the Land.
The 'Lost sheep of Israel' should be seen in terms of Romans 11 and Paul's inclusion (tribe of Benjamin) of himself.

I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.
(Rom 11:1)
etc.

There was a temporary time in history where the Children of Israel were divided into the northern and southern kingdoms, or Israel and Judah respectively. However, When the northern kingdom fell, refugees fled to the Southern kingdom. IOW the Southern Kingdom came to incorporate all 12 tribes. By the time Judah went into Captivity, it was all of the Children of Israel, although it was top heaven with Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. In Babylon, all these captives from the 12 tribes were referred to as Jews, since they came from the kingdom of Judah.

So basically: Hebrew = Israelite = Jew. The only difference is the period of time you are talking about.
Hebrew is from Abraham until Egypt.
Israelite is from Egypt until Babylon
Jew is from Babylon until the present.

As to the "lost sheep of Israel. " Jesus said he came unto the lost sheep of Israel. This can't possibly refer to the lost 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom. WHO DID JESUS ACTUALLY INTERACT WITH in the time he was on earth? Jews in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. "Lost" refers to spiritually lost. So "lost sheep of Israel" refers to sinful Jews, whom Jesus did try very hard to reach.

 

[Meowzltov]

Yes, there is that distinction but when I said 'Jews' I meant generically those believing through the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. There are some physical promises that were given to them that weren't given to the Church...yes the Church shares in the spiritual blessings of Israel though.

Right. The only promise the Church inherits is the one about the seed of Abraham (Christ) being a blessing to the whole world (the Savior).

 

[Clintos]

From the book I am reading, it says these are the basic concepts shared by supersessionists:

• The church is the new Israel.
• Israel is no longer the people of God.
• The destruction of the a Temple and Jerusalem in AD 70 was God's public demonstration of His rejection of Israel as His people.
• Israel's national rejection is permanent.
• Israel has rightly suffered, and continues to suffer, the curses of disobedience.
• The suffering of the Jews since AD 70 is the result of God's righteous judgement due to their collective guilt for their unbelief in the rejecting and killing Jesus.
• The Jews are under God's divine curses for their disobedience.
• The suffering of the Jews is thus self-inflicted.
• The people who call themselves Jew today are the enemies of the Gospel and the church.

 

[Ken Rank]

From the book I am reading, it says these are the basic concepts shared by supersessionists:

• Israel is no longer the people of God.
• • The Jews are under God's divine curses for their disobedience.
  • The suffering of the Jews is thus self-inflicted.

These first three show an anti-Semitic spirit that would cause me to put the book down and never read anything from the author again... unless he/she repents. These two verses... alone... proves the author is clueless...

Romans 3:1 What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?
Romans 3:2 Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.

The word for oracles (logion) means this in Thayer:

1a) in the NT, the words or utterances of God
1b) of the contents of the Mosaic law

So God entrusted the above with a people cursed BY GOD? That makes no sense, and again, reveals their anti-Semitic spirit!

 

[Clintos]

I'm reading his book and find that he may be Jewish or at least a messianic Jew. The book is actually pretty good. his name is Joel Richardson and the book is called:

WHEN A JEW RULES the WORLD WHAT the BIBLE REALLY SAYS ABOUT ISRAEL in the PLAN OF GOD

What does this mean Matthew 21:43?

 

[Ken Rank]

I'm reading his book and find that he may be Jewish or at least a messianic Jew. The book is actually pretty good. his name is Joel Richardson and the book is called:

WHEN A JEW RULES the WORLD WHAT the BIBLE REALLY SAYS ABOUT ISRAEL in the PLAN OF GOD

What does this mean Matthew 21:43?

Again, if GOD entrusted the Jews with His word... then has God cursed the Jews? God is not the author of confusion and the bible is saying one thing that reveals God TRUSTING these people... and Joel Richardson is teaching something entirely different... something that suggests God couldn't possibly trust them.

To answer your question...

Mat 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.
Mat 21:44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder."
Mat 21:45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them.

So Yeshua says the Kingdom will be taken from them and given to those who bear fruit. Is this a statement about all JEWS? No... JESUS WAS JEWISH, PAUL WAS JEWISH, JAMES WAS JEWISH, JOHN WAS JEWISH... etc. etc. etc. Not only that... Acts 21:20 (place your cursor over it) says "many thousands of Jews believed and remained zealous for the Torah (Law)." The word for "many thousands" is murias, which is the Greek word for 10,000 and it is in PLURAL FORM. That means that no less than 20,000 of the 80,000 Jews that lived in and around Jerusalem at that time believed that Yeshua was messiah.

My point... Matthew 21:43 is NOT speaking about all Jews, verse 45 shows us that he was speaking to the Pharisees... but not even all Pharisees (see Acts 23:6 ... and note, this statement was near the END of Paul's life) he was speaking to the elite who stood against him and were threatened by him. That's it.... no anti-Jewish statements here. I would put the book down and find another.

 

[crossnote]

I have to disagree...

For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Romans 2:24‭-‬26 KJV

Just because Paul uses the Gentiles as an example to make his point doesn't nullify the point he is making to the Jews.

 

[Clintos]

Is this fair to say about supersessionism:

"The hard genocidal hatred of radical Islam or Nazism and the more subtle inherently undermining effects of supersessionism indeed all exist on the same spectrum. They work towards or support precisely the same end which is the undermining, divestment, and ultimately, destruction of the Jewish state and the Jewish people."

"Behind all the theological talk, ultimately, supersessionism is an unbiblical theology created by gentile believers who, rather than being content with having been graciously welcomed into the people of God, after freely receiving God's undeserved grace, feel the need to turn around and strip and dispossess the Jewish people of everything that has been promised to them by God of Israel."

I'm doing a personal book report. The quotes are from the book by Joel Richardson

 

[Ken Rank]

Is this fair to say about supersessionism:

"The hard genocidal hatred of radical Islam or Nazism and the more subtle inherently undermining effects of supersessionism indeed all exist on the same spectrum. They work towards or support precisely the same end which is the undermining, divestment, and ultimately, destruction of the Jewish state and the Jewish people."

I couldn't answer this, but I do know there is an underlying and subtle anti-Semitic undertone in our Christian culture. We do not mean for this to be the case, it is just something we are born into. And being born into it means it becomes, subconsciously, the lens through which we view the world around us.

I am not trying to self promote in any way, I am just trying to help. I wrote an article that deals with Western anti-Judaic thought, and there is a sub-article within this article called, "When did Christianity stop looking so Jewish?" Though my reasons for writing this are different than what you are reading, I think there are some commonalities that might go well with the book you are reading and could help with your report. The Roots of Western anti-Judaism

"Behind all the theological talk, ultimately, supersessionism is an unbiblical theology created by gentile believers who, rather than being content with having been graciously welcomed into the people of God, after freely receiving God's undeserved grace, feel the need to turn around and strip and dispossess the Jewish people of everything that has been promised to them by God of Israel."

I doubt this is consciously the case, but he is right. There was a great deal of reactionary theology between Jews and Christians. The latter WERE considered a part of Judaism... a sect... until around the Bar Kokhba revolt (132AD) and within 20 years of that time, there began a great effort to make us look less like them. We even began to call the "Christ killers" despite the FACT that Acts 21:20 reveals (in the Greek) that as many as 1/4 of the Jewish population (or more) believed that Yeshua was messiah.