Not so....and I shall explain my beloved freind Benjamin's mistake here forth-with
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Replacement Theolody-what is it,who teaches it-
- Thread starter Iconoclast
- Start date
And AGAIN, no one is saying that Gentiles become Jews. So stop with the strawman and actually debate.
See above
Speaking to Israel huh?
1 Peter 2:10-11 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;
"In times past were not a people" and "had not obtained mercy" and "as strangers." This was addressed to Israel huh? Only if they were NEVER the people of God could this have been addressed to Israel.
They were not a people of God until God chose Jacob. Haven't you ever read Genesis?
No way! it says " having honest conversations among the Gentiles" which means he was speaking to Jews. Peter was an apostle to Jews not Gentiles. This was the whole reason for Paul as an apostle. Peter was instructing them about there conversations.
Excuse me but they were not Jews and before Jacob all of his ancestors were as described. The Jews have not always been Jews that is just more of your replacement theology which is Bunk.
Yes I did think. I'm always thinking and I believe I'm right because here you are trying to replace the Jews. When one tree is grafted into another type of tree believe it or not that branch still produces the same exact fruit it had before it was cut off it's natural tree. Not to mention the branches that were broken off that we might be grafted in can also replace us if we are so bold as to boast as you do with your replacement doctrine. Romans 11 says you are wrong try reading the whole of it and you will see for your self.
MB
and if ye [are] of Christ then of Abraham ye are seed, and according to promise -- heirs. Gal 3:29 YLT this only do I wish to learn from you -- by works of law the Spirit did ye receive, or by the hearing of faith? Gal 3:2 YLT and we are His witnesses of these sayings, and the Holy Spirit also, whom God gave to those obeying him.' Acts 5:32 YLT according as I said to you: My sheep my voice do hear, and I know them, and they follow me, John 10:27 YLT and Peter said unto them, `Reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, for to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all those afar off, as many as the Lord our God shall call.' Acts 2:38,39 YLT `Saul, Saul, why me dost thou persecute?' Acts 9:4 YLT And the Lord said unto him, `Be going on, because a choice vessel to Me is this one, to bear My name before nations and kings -- the sons also of Israel; Acts 9:15 YLT
And I see when (for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery) I have sent her away, and I give the bill of her divorce unto her, that treacherous Judah her sister hath not feared, and goeth and committeth fornication -- she also. Jer 3:8 YLT
Israel hath been swallowed up, Now they have been among nations, As a vessel in which is no delight. Hosea 8:8 YLT Simeon did declare how at first God did look after to take out of the nations a people for His name, Acts 15:14 YLT
Turn back, O backsliding sons, An affirmation of Jehovah. For I have ruled over you, And taken you one of a city, and two of a family, And have brought you to Zion, Jer. 3:14 YLT
Is God doing in the New Testament exactly what he prophesied he would do in the Old Testament?
Is he calling out from those he did foreknow a people for his name?
Is God going to do the following or was God just blowing hot air as is blown on this board, including, "moi".
And I will cause the captivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel to return, and will build them, as at the first.And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. And it shall be to me a name of joy, a praise and an honour before all the nations of the earth, which shall hear all the good that I do unto them: and they shall fear and tremble for all the goodness and for all the prosperity that I procure unto it. Jer. 33:7-9 KJV
And I see when (for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery) I have sent her away, and I give the bill of her divorce unto her, that treacherous Judah her sister hath not feared, and goeth and committeth fornication -- she also. Jer 3:8 YLT
Israel hath been swallowed up, Now they have been among nations, As a vessel in which is no delight. Hosea 8:8 YLT Simeon did declare how at first God did look after to take out of the nations a people for His name, Acts 15:14 YLT
Turn back, O backsliding sons, An affirmation of Jehovah. For I have ruled over you, And taken you one of a city, and two of a family, And have brought you to Zion, Jer. 3:14 YLT
Is God doing in the New Testament exactly what he prophesied he would do in the Old Testament?
Is he calling out from those he did foreknow a people for his name?
Is God going to do the following or was God just blowing hot air as is blown on this board, including, "moi".
And I will cause the captivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel to return, and will build them, as at the first.And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. And it shall be to me a name of joy, a praise and an honour before all the nations of the earth, which shall hear all the good that I do unto them: and they shall fear and tremble for all the goodness and for all the prosperity that I procure unto it. Jer. 33:7-9 KJV
Last edited by a moderator:
[Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law For if the inheritance of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave to Abraham by promise. Gal. 3:21,18
So the promise concerns life that is given to one. It is inherited by the one to whom it is given.
Now the promise of this life was given to Abraham, however at the time the book of Hebrews was written, maybe post 60 AD Abraham had died without having received the promises and I do not believe he has received the promises to date. That leaves the other recipient of the promises that being the seed, singular, of Abraham, the Christ. The Christ, the heir of God, Hebrews 1:2.
Gal. 3:19 Wherefore then the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
The promise that gives life: In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; Titus 1:2
Anyone who receives the hope of eternal life will receive it because they have been put in Christ by the promise of the Holy Spirit which they received by hearing of the faith of Christ of obedience unto death and God his Father raising him from the dead. By being given the Holy Spirit and being in Christ they will also be the seed of Abraham and heirs according to the promise.
Jesus is, the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead;
Jesus received the promise of God. Jesus became, the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith.
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Good master what must I do to inherit eternal life?
So the promise concerns life that is given to one. It is inherited by the one to whom it is given.
Now the promise of this life was given to Abraham, however at the time the book of Hebrews was written, maybe post 60 AD Abraham had died without having received the promises and I do not believe he has received the promises to date. That leaves the other recipient of the promises that being the seed, singular, of Abraham, the Christ. The Christ, the heir of God, Hebrews 1:2.
Gal. 3:19 Wherefore then the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
The promise that gives life: In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; Titus 1:2
Anyone who receives the hope of eternal life will receive it because they have been put in Christ by the promise of the Holy Spirit which they received by hearing of the faith of Christ of obedience unto death and God his Father raising him from the dead. By being given the Holy Spirit and being in Christ they will also be the seed of Abraham and heirs according to the promise.
Jesus is, the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead;
Jesus received the promise of God. Jesus became, the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith.
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Good master what must I do to inherit eternal life?
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is part of an answer To John M-
1). Isaiah’s servant songs have a double referent that has long baffled Jewish commentators. On the one hand, they refer to Israel, God’s chosen one and servant (41:8-9; 44:1-2, 21; 45:4; 49:3). On the other, they seem also to refer to some individual (42:1-4). These prophesies are interpreted by the New Testament as referring to Christ (Matthew 8:17 and Acts 8:30-35)
2). Matthew sees a double referent in Hosea 11:1, ("Out of Egypt I called my son")
3). Paul identifies Christ, not physical Israel, as Abraham’s seed (Galatians 3:16). Galatians 3:7 and Romans 4:11, 16, moreover, identify the church as Abraham’s offspring.
4). Henceforth, we are in Christ the true Israel: Galatians 3:26-29, Romans 2:28-29, and Philippians 3:3.
5). The Old Covenant is obsolete, having been superseded by the New: Hebrews 8:8-12 identifies the new covenant with Israel (Jeremiah 31:33-34) with the covenant instituted by Christ with the church. Most importantly, Hebrews 8:13 declares the old covenant obsolete and passing away. This makes impossible the dispensational view of Ezekiel 40-48 as a reinstitution of temple sacrifice.
6). The upshot is that the Old Testament did not see how its own prophesies were to be fulfilled - indeed, it could not prior to Christ. The New Testament authors were able to interpret the Old Testament in the light of His coming of the new covenant that He instituted. So should we.
As Strimple points out, this means that Jesus is the true Israel, and that all Scripture–especially its prophetic sections–must be read through a Christ-centered hermeneutic, not a dispensational one which centers upon national Israel.
In his lecture, MacArthur makes the point that since God elects Israel, and since “Israel means Israel,” any other approach to eschatology destroys the perspicuity of the Old Testament. Yes, Dr. MacArthur is right that Israel always means Israel, but that’s not the point.
When the writers of the New Testament see Israel in the light of the coming of Jesus Christ, they now see that the nation of Israel and the Sinaitic covenant which established it, were intended by God to point ahead to the coming of Jesus. That’s what Paul is getting at in Galatians 3:19-25, when he speaks of the law as intended by God to prepare the way for the coming of Christ. This is because the law exposes our sin and like a school-master drives us to Christ.
But this truth was largely hidden in the types and shadows of the Old Testament era in redemptive history because Christ had not yet come and the ultimate purpose of the law could not yet be seen. But this same truth is impossible to escape after Jesus steps out of type and shadow onto the center stage of redemption (Galatians 4:4-5). It Jesus who now tells us the true purpose of the Old Covenant–“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me" (John 5:39). This is not amillennial "spiritualizing" of Scripture, it is the method of biblical interpretation taught us by Jesus and his apostles!
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace....resources-in-light-of-macarthurs-charges.html
1). Isaiah’s servant songs have a double referent that has long baffled Jewish commentators. On the one hand, they refer to Israel, God’s chosen one and servant (41:8-9; 44:1-2, 21; 45:4; 49:3). On the other, they seem also to refer to some individual (42:1-4). These prophesies are interpreted by the New Testament as referring to Christ (Matthew 8:17 and Acts 8:30-35)
2). Matthew sees a double referent in Hosea 11:1, ("Out of Egypt I called my son")
3). Paul identifies Christ, not physical Israel, as Abraham’s seed (Galatians 3:16). Galatians 3:7 and Romans 4:11, 16, moreover, identify the church as Abraham’s offspring.
4). Henceforth, we are in Christ the true Israel: Galatians 3:26-29, Romans 2:28-29, and Philippians 3:3.
5). The Old Covenant is obsolete, having been superseded by the New: Hebrews 8:8-12 identifies the new covenant with Israel (Jeremiah 31:33-34) with the covenant instituted by Christ with the church. Most importantly, Hebrews 8:13 declares the old covenant obsolete and passing away. This makes impossible the dispensational view of Ezekiel 40-48 as a reinstitution of temple sacrifice.
6). The upshot is that the Old Testament did not see how its own prophesies were to be fulfilled - indeed, it could not prior to Christ. The New Testament authors were able to interpret the Old Testament in the light of His coming of the new covenant that He instituted. So should we.
As Strimple points out, this means that Jesus is the true Israel, and that all Scripture–especially its prophetic sections–must be read through a Christ-centered hermeneutic, not a dispensational one which centers upon national Israel.
In his lecture, MacArthur makes the point that since God elects Israel, and since “Israel means Israel,” any other approach to eschatology destroys the perspicuity of the Old Testament. Yes, Dr. MacArthur is right that Israel always means Israel, but that’s not the point.
When the writers of the New Testament see Israel in the light of the coming of Jesus Christ, they now see that the nation of Israel and the Sinaitic covenant which established it, were intended by God to point ahead to the coming of Jesus. That’s what Paul is getting at in Galatians 3:19-25, when he speaks of the law as intended by God to prepare the way for the coming of Christ. This is because the law exposes our sin and like a school-master drives us to Christ.
But this truth was largely hidden in the types and shadows of the Old Testament era in redemptive history because Christ had not yet come and the ultimate purpose of the law could not yet be seen. But this same truth is impossible to escape after Jesus steps out of type and shadow onto the center stage of redemption (Galatians 4:4-5). It Jesus who now tells us the true purpose of the Old Covenant–“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me" (John 5:39). This is not amillennial "spiritualizing" of Scripture, it is the method of biblical interpretation taught us by Jesus and his apostles!
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace....resources-in-light-of-macarthurs-charges.html
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, but I think your wrong from the get-go. You begin with a false presumption deeply rooted to Scofield principles, no doubt, and this is evident buy what I see in the attempt to dissect the promise made to all mankind through the fulfillment of Jesus Christ, which I contend Paul is teaching how that has been progressively revealed but you purpose to turn it into more than one covenant which is vitally needed for Dispensationalism to "fly".
There is but one promise, one covenant, one Gospel in the big picture that is being progressively revealed in the Bible, it applies to all people of faith, NEVER does this promise extend to or become pre-deterministic selection or/by by pedigree; and that promise begins all the way back to before the foundation of the world, it then moves forward in creation where the revelation of this covenant to mankind makes its beginning as God’s provision for sin : “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” (Gen 3:15). The revelation of THE covenant then begins to display God’s grace (Gen 3:16-19) and the same covenant goes forward to its conclusion which Paul clearly explains and finishes revealing it all came about in a mystery and why it did.
This promise (covenant) we are speaking of and you attempt to wrongly divide clearly applies to BOTH Abraham and Jacob/Israel. (Heb 11:9) By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
Did you hear that? The same promise! It's one promise ...by faith!
Paul is revealing to the “Jews”/Israelites that salvation comes one way, by faith, surely you are NOT suggesting he would be “qualifying” himself worthy in any other way such as by his pedigree?!?
The blessings of the promise begin and end in Christ. The just shall live by faith. There is only one seed, one kind of sons to which these blessings belong to by promise, which is Christ:
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
The seeds, all of them, were brought together in the promise as one in the Body of Christ. All saints, those before Abraham and after came by faith in Christ –
1Co 10:1-4
(1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
(2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
(3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
(4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
- the understanding of the seed of Abraham must start in from Gen 3:15 and the significance of the name Israel has a specific purpose toward the meaning of that name which has to do with progressively revealing the one promise to all by faith that I’m afraid you are overlooking because of being caught up in dispensational systematic theology of separation.
Wow, well, where to end, this is why I said earlier that it would take several threads to sort through this and I don’t mean to sound offensive but not only do I not have time to go through all this (got big changes in my career and other things going on and weighing on me heavily right now) but I fully understand without getting down to the roots and just going about to answer dispensationalist dogma that my rebuttals would most likely end up to be dogmatic right back and I don’t want to end up sounding like I’m going all Icon on you :smilewinkgrin: if I were to even try address all these things without getting the basics down first. :1_grouphug:
Quickly:
And before the seed of Abraham or Abraham the father of faith was Jesus who was that seed.
I contend the term “Israel” means “faithful” throughout history as the secular ethnic application is different than the redemptive context in scripture. That significance and purpose of that name should not be overlooked, it was part of the explanation of the promise as it was progressively revealed. Further, once again, John the Baptist rebuffed the Pharisees in this matter of being “Israelites” in the sense you use it and as to who they thought their father was, while thinking themselves to have a blood relationship to recieve and be entitled thereby to the covenantal promises:
(Mat 3:9) And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
(Mat 3:10) And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
The axe has been laid to those roots and that old way of thinking yet the belief in salvation by pedigree lives on today = SERIOUSLY missing the points made in 1Cor 2…
Paul is speaking to “all” in Rome, which includes the “Jews”. In Romans 11:7 Paul is speaking of the revealed mystery and that is regards to the Israelites (in the secular sense, by means of ethnic pedigree) which have not obtained what they were looking for, they are still trippin over those stumbling blocks concerning this revelation.
In short, I simply object to the division you are making here which leads to dual covenant doctrines. I consider myself a child of Abraham as well as part of spiritual Israel (I focus on the true meaning of the term…and BTW you would never be able to hold to “Jews” as being of Israel in the sense you use it, to complete your necessary grouping, as I began to explain in my prior post) all of one seed in Christ, no divisions for me.
Cont:
Last edited by a moderator:
Scofield is yet another in depth subject but he is seriously messed up in his teaching from the beginning of his "sorry" interpretation of 2Tim 2:15 which he uses to begin to teach his listeners how they need to “rightly divide” the scriptures to force fit them to systematic dispensational teachings. Yes, many people came to believe Dispensationalism because of the presumptions given to them by Scofield and his Bible, no argument there. I forget what he says about the Gap Theory but personally holding to a type of Gap Theory I do remember seeing it quite different than he does. And yes, I've met many people that were brought up by and just love that Bible...all I can say to that is Col 2:8.
Hmm, no, not feeling bruised a bit. Wish I could break this down better to get to bottom of some things as I can’t begin to tell you here how troubling I find Dispensationalism to be concerning the many conclusions to the separations they make and what I believe it leads into. Truth is what it is about and pertaining to this subject I don’t really expect to resolve many issue here under this format, especially with someone who is long time rooted into dispensationalist beliefs.
Same here, don’t worry I’ve learned some time ago that this subject easily gets intense and out of hand, paid the price for some of those conflicts, learned my lesson and decided to be very careful about going dogmatic on this because it just isn’t important enough to me to let it get between me and another one of my beloved friends. I actually usually avoid this subject for that reason and figure if the anti-Christ comes and my friends start sprouting feathers thinking to escape and try to go flying off to him…then being prepared, with all my armor on I will break out my lasso and deal with it then. :smilewinkgrin:
Last edited by a moderator:
11 And I say unto you, that many shall come from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven:
12 but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth. Mt 8
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Mt 21:43
28 There shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast forth without.
29 And they shall come from the east and west, and from the north and south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh Phil 3:3
If this is not being 'replaced', then I guess I don't understand the meaning of the word.
12 but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth. Mt 8
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Mt 21:43
28 There shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast forth without.
29 And they shall come from the east and west, and from the north and south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh Phil 3:3
If this is not being 'replaced', then I guess I don't understand the meaning of the word.
Would say God grafted gentiles into being saved by Yeshua, but that He did not cast away His people of promise!
There very clearly is a casting away here JF; your disputing of it does not change that fact:
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman.
23 Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the son by the freewoman is born through promise.
24 Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.
25 Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to the Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children.
26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother.
27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: For more are the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband.
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now.
30 Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son : for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman.
31 Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. Gal 4
There is only one promise of which all others are tied to and that is the promise in post #87.
It is the promise of which they were heirs and of which we are heirs.
The promise that the seed of Abraham would also be the seed of Elohim, the Son of the Living God. The only begotten Son. Abraham saw the day of Jesus the Son of God in that Jesus would come into the world through Isaac yet God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Then if this was going to take place there muse be going to be the resurrection to the promised life of the God will provide himself a Lamb, the Son of God. I will become who I am becoming.
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.
It is not replacement it is a process. There is a reason for the feast of firstfruits, the feast of trumpets, the day of Atonement, the feast of tabernacles.
For if the casting away of them [be] the reconciling of the world, what [shall] the receiving [of them be], but life from the dead? For if the firstfruit [be] holy, the lump [is] also [holy]: and if the root [be] holy, so [are] the branches.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, 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:
I will ask again.
What is God going to do after he is through calling out a people for his name?
If replacement theology is true then it would be your children cast out of the Kingdom of God. Not the Jews. LOL
If you think about it according to the way you think. The Jews never had the Kingdom of God. I wonder who was He speaking about. Hmmmmm He just doesn't say does He.
Ah the question who are they who will be cast out according to you it will be Gentiles. Not once are the Jews mentioned. You have quite an imagination.
MB
paul must be confused, for he also stated
Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
he saw that God was done with the jewish peoples, but used their hardness to bring we gentiles into salvation way also!
think he knew this fact better than you on God rejecting them!