Replacement Theology--Heresy?

Ok, you've got me. What is Replacement Theology, either I haven't heard of it, or I ma calling it something else.

 

Calling replacement theology "heresy" is the tool of hard-core dispensationalists.

I find it quite extreme to say that.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replacement_theology

 

I too am interested in why it is considered heresy, especially after reading the link above. Thanks Joseph.

Christ is the only way.
Just because someone is a Jew doesn't mean they are automatically saved.
Seems like only the liberals would call it heresy. Am I right?

 

"Supercessionism" is just a euphemism for the same heresy. It's not the term that matters, but rather the false teaching that misrepresents God's Word and His intentions.

Those Christians that adhere to this false teaching toward Israel remind me of Job's friends attitude toward him.

 

TinyTim.
It is considered a heresy because it misrepresnts God's Word, and His intentions toward Israel, His love.

"After decades of the infant Church's persecution at the instigation of the unbelieving Jews, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans and the Jews scattered. Although the persecution continued from the Romans, the pressure was off of the Church from the Jewish end. Many Christians couldn't help feeling a little superior to unbelieving Jews. After all, God had avenged them and demonstrated the triumph of Christianity over rabbinic Judaism. Jesus had predicted this catastrophe, showing that He was indeed the Son of God. As the Church grew over the next few centuries, being predominantly Gentile, this attitude began to develop into anti-Semitism in many local churches. We find Christian writers of the second and third centuries showing glimmers of scorn for the Jews. The Jewish and early Christian doctrine, that Messiah would come to restore Israel, fulfilling His Old Testament promises of a golden age, began to lose popularity among Christians.

This attitude gave birth to a fourth century heresy defined in Augustine's massive work, "The City of God." His interpretation held that God was finished with Israel. They had been rejected forever because they rejected Christ. The prophecies of the Old Testament, regarding a Millennial Kingdom with Jerusalem as the capital of the whole world, were reinterpreted symbolically, representing the Catholic "kingdom" of the "Church" in the present age. This system is known as "Replacement Theology" because the Old Testament prophecies are interpreted allegorically, and applied to the Gentile Church. So, effectively, the Church has usurped Israel's place and promises. The allegorizing of the Millennium and applying these passages to the present age of the Church is called "A-millennialism." Augustine replaced the Jewish "carnal" interpretation of a physical kingdom with his "spiritual" enlightened interpretation. In Augustine's view, when Jesus returns, this world will be destroyed and Christians will then enjoy heaven forever, with the Jews confined to hell. This view invited the subsequent persecution of Jews by the Roman Catholic Church for hundreds of years. It also became the theological excuse for the holocaust.

After the Reformation, most Protestants simply made a few modifications to Replacement Theology / A-millennialism, but continued to hold to its basic premise. However, some Protestants began to question the Catholic dogma. As Christians returned to a more literal interpretation of the Bible, many also returned to the ancient (pre-millennial) Christian view of prophecy, and the relationship between Christians and Jews. In this revived pre-millennialism, Christians were again seen as "adopted" into Israel, and unbelieving Israel temporarily "blinded" and separated from God, but soon to be restored. This is "historic" pre-millennialism, what the early Church believed prior to St. Augustine. Of course, historic pre-millennialism sees only one future coming of Jesus Christ, both to rescue the Church, and destroy the Babylonian system and the Beast (post-trib)."

http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/disp1.html

Any reading of Romans 11 makes it quite clear that we are only justified through the root of Abraham.

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of thismystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness
in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from
Jacob:
For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes.
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." Rom. 11:25-29

And...

"My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him.
His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven.
If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments;
If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments;
Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.
Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.
My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.
Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David.
His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me." Ps. 89:28-36

Heb. 13:8 says that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. But this heresy calls God a liar considering the following verses as well: (to name just a few)

Ex. 4:22
Num. 24:1
Zech. 1:14-15; 2:8; 8:8
Isa. 4:1; 49:14-17; 60:12-14; 61:9; 62; 66:8-10
Deut. 7:6-8,13-15; 15:6
Ezra 3:11
Ps. 105:10; 135:4; 147:19-20
1 Sam. 12:22
Zeph. 3:13-20
Jer. 31:3; 33:9
Hos. 2:19-23
Gen. 17:4-8,19-21

I would recommend that anyone thinking about adhering to this falsehood read Gen. 12:3. Look what happened to the Catholic Church.

http://www.biblicist.org/bible/replace.htm

http://www.aquatechnology.net/RESURGENCE.html

 

So now we resort to name-calling?

 

JackRUS, thank you. You are absolutely right on.


Israel My Beloved

The doctrine of replacement theology is just a euphamism/excuse for Jew hatred.

 

What is the definition of heresy for you all?

 

The doctrine of replacement theology, as an example. Misrepresents the truth of God's Word and His Covenants.

 

Yet it is your view LE that follows in the footsteps of Hitler.

Your own theology tells you that 2/3 of the Jews will be killed during the "tribulation" yet it is dispies that want to get as many Jews back into this killing field as possible. Do you think these "do gooders" are letting the Jews know, as they board the plane,that they believe 2 of every 3 of them will be killed and what is left will become Christian? Oh, and by the way have a nice flight.

http://www.ifcj.org/site/PageServer?pagename=programs_wings

Through their generous donations to Wings, The Fellowship’s friends have brought hundreds of thousands of Jews to the Holy Land. By funding this “second exodus” of Jews from oppression to freedom, Fellowship donors are showing their compassion and concern for the Jewish people.

Congrats LE, you will help kill more Jews than even Hitler. Yet somehow preterist are anti-semetic?

 

I am getting my view directly from Scripture. Not from the opinions of some early said-Christians (Catholics) and non-apostles. And I don't trust the writings of the so-called Early Church Fathers because the Catholic Church kept most of these writings, and some have been deemed to be spurious by scholars. So I trust only Scripture. Besides, the pre-mil view is also suppored in early writings as well.

And I keep noticing that both you and Grasshopper keep bringing up Jack Van Impe. Might I ask you both if you are getting your theology from the first century heretic, Hymenaeus?

http://www.tektonics.org/esch/hythere.html

He certainly held your views as well. Frankly I'll take Van Impe, Charles Stanley, Adrian Rogers, J. Vernon McGee, etc., over your church father Hymenaeus any day.

And neither Romans 10 nor Galatians 3 has anything in it that eliminates the Jewish nation from their future salvation and Messiah. Rather, those Scriptures argue that we are added as well to their good forture. And it is true that we are all saved the same way.

And the word "superceded" means the exact same thing as replace.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=superseded&r=66

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=80025&dict=CALD

And if none of the verses that I gave you about Isreal give you any indication that God will not cast off Israel firever, then possibly 1 Cor. 2:14 applies to you.

Question: If God has cast off the nation of Israel forever and has replaced it with the church, then why did He draw them back into the land of Israel?

"Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and
I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely:
And they shall be my people, and I will be their God:
And I will give them one heart, and one way, (John 14:6) that they may fear me
for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them:
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in
their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.
Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul.
For thus saith the LORD; Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have
promised them." Jer. 32:37-42

"In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:
That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.
And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.
And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the
LORD thy God." Amos 9:11-15

 

You quote an article from Dee Dee Warren? Do a little research on this women. The first thing you’ll find is that her name isn’t Dee Dee Warren.
Secondly in case you didn’t know, Hymenaeus was not a Church father nor did he write any books on theology. Unless you have some, do you? Is this the best you can do?

Is there a reason you started at verse 27 and not 26? Yes I think so.

Jer 32:36 And now therefore thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning this city, whereof ye say, It shall be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon by the sword , and by the famine, and by the pestilence;

Don't you just hate it when context is given in scripture? It takes all the fun out of it.

What does the well known heretic and Baptist theologian John Gill say of this?

The heretic John Gill for some reason associates this with the Babylonian captivity. Wonder why?

Jer 32:37 - Behold, I will gather them out of all countries,.... At the end of the seventy years' captivity; and which will have a greater accomplishment in the latter day, when the Jews shall be converted, and gathered from their present dispersion all over the earth:

whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath: or "whither I shall drive them", or "shall have driven them" (m); for as yet they were not thus driven and dispersed. A heap of words is made use of to express the greatness of the Lord's indignation at them for their sins, the cause of their expulsion out of the land:

and I will bring them again unto this place ; the city of Jerusalem; as they were at the end of the seventy years' captivity; and when the promise was fulfilled, that they should purchase and possess fields and vineyards; and as they will likewise at the time of their conversion in the latter day:

and I will cause them to dwell safely ; which yet they did not for any continuance after their return from Babylon; being, as Jerom observes, often molested by the Persians, Macedonians, and Egyptians; and at last destroyed by the Romans: their troubles in the times of the Maccabees are very notorious; so that this refers either to the first times of the Gospel, and to the Jews that then believed in Christ; or rather to times yet to come, and which are prophesied of at Jer_32:37.

Burn that heretic at the stake.

James, another heretic and Church father interprets this verse for us. Would Roxella dare bring this to Jack's attention?

Act 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
Act 15:15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
Act 15:16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
Act 15:17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

It it is not fulfilled, then Gentiles cannot be saved.

 

Why should you care, GH, you don't believe the Bible is literal. I will try to be patient and overlook the venom in your post.

There will be a literal (which you don't believe) 144,000 sealed who will be preaching to the Jews and 2 (literal) witnesses who will be preaching to the Jews. God will (literally) ultimately come and fight the nations who try to destroy Israel and He will (literally) save the Nation of Israel.

I don't find it coincidental at all that a great many who believe in Replacement Theology believe the Bible is figurative.

 

Grasshopper.
How in the world does verse 26 change the context of my post in Jer. 32? That is another prophesy that starts out with "Then came the word of the Lord to Jeremiah..."

And even verse 36 doesn't preclude a future fulfillment of the everlasting covenant with Israel. You have no good argument here.

And I don't see your argument from Acts at all. Why does David's throne have to be set up for Gentiles to be saved?